21 So. 3d 477 - Dalme v. Dalme’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The article recognizes the parent’s paramount right to custody of the child and applies a heavier burden than that required in modifying a consent decree— thus presenting two distinct standards that could be applied in the present matter. We find, however, that the same result should be reached under both tests. So long as awarding custody to the parent would be detrimental to the child and awarding custody to the nonparent would serve the child’s best interests, an award of custody to the Appellees would be appropriate in this case.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tracie F. v. Francisco D. · 188 So. 3d 376 - George v. Dugas

2. “We have been asked to review the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s request to modify-a consent custody agreement pertaining to a minor child. It is significant that there have been two custody decrees on this matter and that both of them have been consented to by Appellant. This court has noted that such agreements may only be modified when there is a showing that there has been a material change in circumstances and that the modification would be in the best interest of the minor child. If a prior award of custody has been made by consent decree, the proponent for change must show that a material change in circumstances affecting the child’s welfare has occurred since the last custody judgment before the court will consider a change in custody. Bergeron v. Bergeron, 492 So.2d 1193, 1200 (La.1986); Millet v. Andrasko, 93-0520, p[p], 5-6 (La.App. 1st Cir.3/11/94), 640 So.2d 368, 370-71 . If a nonparent has been awarded custody, the parent moving for a change or modification must show a'change in circumstances and that the change in custody would be-in the best interest of the child. Millet , 93-0520, at p[p]. 5-6, 640 So.2d at 371. Matter of Landrum, 97-826, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/10/97), 704 So.2d 872, 874 (quoting Robert v. Gaudet, 96-2506, p. 6 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/27/97), 691 So.2d 780, 783 ).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 188 So. 3d 376 - George v. Dugas