Hendrix v. Hendrix’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““But if a parent, out of regard for the feelings or affections of kindred, or for purposes of education or training, or for any other just and reasonable cause, permits or allows a child to remain in the custody of another person, under such circumstances as to show that he or she did not intend to sever the relation of parent and child, or to shirk or evade the duty of rearing and maintaining it, and was not callous or indifferent as to its welfare, then such conduct does not bar his or her right to reclaim its custody, even though during such time the affections of the child and the custodian for each other may have grown to be very great. In such a case the affections of the custodian can not outweigh the right of the parent, if otherwise suitable to have the custody.” 180 Miss. at 655 , 178 So. at 336 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. McWilliams v. Burns · Lee v. State ex rel. Lee

2. “‘ ‘ Taking together all of the undisputed facts disclosed by the record, and analyzing them in context, it appears that appellee and her husband, and the appellants and their child, lived substantially as one family for most of the period in question. Some of the reasons for this was (were) Ira’s inability to get and hold jobs, his financial troubles, Addie’s illness, and the fact that she was working full time both before and after Ira went into the army.” 226 Miss. at 121 , 83 So. 2d at 810 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. McWilliams v. Burns

3. ““Appellee has failed to meet her burden of proof to clearly show by the evidence that appellants abandoned their child. An abandonment is not shown within the legal meaning of this term which would cause a forfeiture of appellants’ right to Martha’s custody.” 226 Miss. at 122 , 83 So. 2d at 810 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. McWilliams v. Burns