Scott v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently May 2007 · most notably Albright v. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Fetters (1980), 257 Pa. Super. 468 - Scarlett v. Scarlett (1978)
49 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 240 Pa. Super. 382 - Gunter v. Gunter · 226 Pa. Super. 229 - Commonwealth ex rel. Grillo v. Shuster · 228 Pa. Super. 312 - Augustine v. Augustine · Commonwealth Ex Rel. Lotz v. Lotz · 179 Pa. Super. 83 - Commonwealth ex rel. Turner v. Strange
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We agree that Charles [the father] was awarded partial [emphasis in original] custody rather than visitation, however we do not agree that it was error to do so. The trial judge found that ill will, altercations and arguments arose between Charles and Virginia and her parents. Since the child resides with Virginia and her parents, it is clear that visitation would not be proper. Therefore, the only alternative is to allow Charles to visit his son out of the presence of Virginia and her parents. This alternative is by definition partial custody. To deny this type of relief merely because Charles, in his petition, used the term visitation instead of partial custody would cause an unfair result simply on the basis of technicality and semantics. Charles wanted only to see his son. Accordingly, the lower court had full authority to enter this order which is correct and proper under the circumstances of this case. Id., 240 Pa.Super. at 67 , 368 A.2d at 290 (emphasis added). In his concurring opinion in Scott , Judge Spaeth suggested that the term “partial custody” be limited “[t]o cases where psychological considerations, as in the present case, or geographical reasons, [citation omitted] . .. require that the non-custodial parent see the child out of the presence of the custodial parent.” Id., 240 Pa.Super. at 69 , 368 A.2d at 291 . We hold here that despite the fact that the grandparents used the term “visitation” in their pleadings and brief, that they actually seek partial cust”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“I suggest that we . . . limit use of the term `partial custody' to cases where psychological considerations . . . or geographical reasons . . . require that the non-custodial parent see the child out of the presence of the custodial parent.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Only when the evidence clearly shows that a mother is unfit to associate with her children should she be denied the right to see them. Commonwealth ex rel. Turner v. Strange, 179 Pa.Super. 83 , 115 A.2d 885 (1955).”
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.