Reilly v. Reilly’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently October 2017
15 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Jones · Commonwealth Ex Rel. Hickey v. Hickey · 103 Pa. Super. 27 - In Re Custody of Minor Children of Rosenthal · 150 Pa. Super. 649 - Commonwealth Ex Rel. Camp v. Camp · Commonwealth ex rel. Shroad v. Smith
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is true that the jurisdiction of the subject matter in a child-custody case, i.e., the right to custody of the child, follows either the domicile of the child or the residence of the child. Commonwealth ex rel. Camp v. Camp, 150 Pa. Superior Ct. 649 , 29 A. 2d 363 (1942). Furthermore, when parents are divorced or separated, the child takes the domicile of the parent with whom he lives in fact. Commonwealth ex rel. Burke v. Burke, 168 Pa. Superior Ct. 578 , 80 A. 2d 87 (1951). When a child either fives in Pennsylvania or is domiciled in the Commonwealth,Pennsylvania courts have jurisdiction to determine which parent is entitled to custody of the child.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Weymers v. Weymers““Except where the court has committed a person to detention outside its judicial district, an exception not here applicable, the statutes governing writs of habeas corpus make it clear that before a court in a judicial district has the power to determine a writ, the person must be restrained or confined in that district. See Commonwealth ex rel. Mees v. Mathieu, 107 Pa. Superior Ct. 261 , 163 A. 109 (1932).” 219 Pa. Superior Ct. at 89 , 280 A.2d at 641 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Any judge of a court of common pleas within this Commonwealth shall have jurisdiction, at any time, to issue a writ of habeas corpus upon application by, or on behalf of, any person . . . alleged to be unlawfully imprisoned or detained in any penitentiary ... or other place, (a) within the judge’s judicial district. . .” 12 P.S. §1901.”
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.