Dawson v. Eversberg’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
6 district · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently May 2012 · most notably Bridges v. Nicely (1985), Taxiera v. Malkus (1990)
6 district · 36 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 Walker v. Gardner · Spencer v. Franks · Beltran v. Heim · Logan v. Coup · Lippy v. Breidenstein
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Child of his mother. — A child born to parents who have not participated in a marriage ceremony with each other shall be considered to be the child of his mother. (b) Child of his father. — A child born to parents who have not participated in a marriage ceremony with each other shall be considered to be the child of his father only if the father (1) Has been judicially determined to be the father in an action brought under the statutes relating to paternity proceedings; or (2) Has acknowledged himself, in writing, to be the father; or (3) Has openly and notoriously recognized the child to be his child; or (4) Has subsequently married the mother and has acknowledged himself, orally or in writing, to be the father, (emphasis added).”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““* * * It is beyond dispute that conditions (1), (2) and (3), as set forth in § 1-208, have been established; * * *. It seems to us that either Eversberg or Doris is free to seek a judicial declaration that the children ‘shall be deemed to be the’ children of Eversberg, for the purpose of bringing them within the meaning of ‘child’ as defined in § 1-205, within the meaning of ‘issue’ as defined in § 1-209 and thus enabling them to inherit from him as provided in § 3-103; and, perhaps, at some future time, should Eversberg become destitute, to become responsible for contributing to his support as required by Code, Art. 27, § 104 (1967 Repl. Vol.). Cf. Buford v. Bunn, 247 Md. 203 (1967), and Quinan v. Schneider, 247 Md. 310 (1967).” 257 Md. at 315 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Thomas v. Solis“This Section also spells out more fully the procedure for legitimation by acknowledgment without a subsequent marriage as is now required by Maryland law. It reflects the modern policy in the direction of mitigating the impact Of illegitimacy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.