Jb v. Ab’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
51 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently November 2003 · most notably 167 W. Va. 59 - Garska v. McCoy (1981), 182 W. Va. 57 - David M. v. Margaret M. (1989)
51 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 Craig v. Boren · 160 W. Va. 172 - State Ex Rel . Harris v. Calendine · 153 W. Va. 404 - State Ex Rel. Kiger v. Hancock · 131 W. Va. 302 - State Ex Rel. Lipscomb v. Joplin · 160 W. Va. 329 - State v. City of Follansbee
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“With reference to the custody of very young children, the law presumes that it is in the best interests of such children to be placed in the custody of their primary caretaker, if he or she is fit.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“... an adolescent fourteen years of age or older ... has an absolute right under W.Va.Code, 44-10-4 [1923] to nominate his own guardian.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“... Where there is a child under fourteen years of age, but sufficiently mature that he can intelligently express a voluntary preference for one parent, the trial judge is entitled to give that preference such weight as circumstances warrant, and where such child demonstrates a preference for the parent who is not the primary caretaker, the trial judge is entitled to conclude that the presumption in favor of the primary caretaker is rebutted.”
2 later decisions 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.