Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 214 MDAPP 600 - In re Priscilla B.

In re Priscilla B.’s Empirical Analysis

2013

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
August 2020
most recently cited

16 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Davis v. Davis · In Re Yve S. · State v. Ware · Ragland v. State · 42 Md. App. 596 - Wenger v. Wenger

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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A] child who requires court intervention because: (1) The child has been abused, has been neglected, has a developmental disability, or has a mental disorder; and (2) The child’s parents, guardian, or custodian are unable or unwilling to give proper care and attention to the child and the child's needs.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “leaving of a child unattended or other failure to give proper care and attention to a child by any parent ... of the child under circumstances that indicate ... that the child's health or welfare is harmed or placed at substantial risk of harm[.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “neglect might not involve affirmative conduct ... [like abuse], the court assesses neglect by assessing the inaction of a parent[,]”
    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.