Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 229 Or. 33 - Cutts v. Cutts

Cutts v. Cutts’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
3
states following
February 2005
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 2005

7 state decisions

3019611970198019902000decided

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.

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. “Even if it were true that Stanford Cutts [the father] wilfully worked a fraud upon the court, which has not been demonstrated, we do not believe such collateral misconduct is sufficient ground to constitute the kind of depravity required to invoke the provisions of ORS 419.523.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “condition seriously detrimental to the child”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Termination of parental rights; grounds.”
    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.