E.U. v. J.E.’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 28 Cal. 3d 692 - California Teachers Ass'n v. San Diego Community College District · 144 Cal. App. 4th 785 - Robertson v. Fleetwood Travel Trailers of California, Inc. · 220 Cal. App. 3d 814 - In Re Daniel CH · John Siebel Associates v. Keele · 140 Cal. App. 4th 96 - In Re Marriage of David and Martha M.
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.
“The Family Code [section] 3047 [ subdivision](b)(2) presumption applies in this case. Upon Father's return from his October 13, 2015[,] deployment, the custody schedule presumptively should revert back to September 9, 2015[,] unless 'the party opposing reversion of the order makes a prima facie showing that reversion is not in the best interest of the child.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“shall revert to the order that was in place before the modification, unless the court determines that it is not in the best interest of the child .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“to the extent feasible within existing resources and court practices.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.