Estes v. Estes’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
125 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 125 later decisions — most recently June 2011 · most notably 492 So. 2d 1193 - Bergeron v. Bergeron (1986), 390 So. 2d 1325 - Bordelon v. Bordelon (1980)
125 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 Fulco v. Fulco · City of Clearwater v. Reeves · 140 So. 2d 916 - Tullier v. Tullier · 232 So. 2d 521 - Nugent v. Nugent · Malpica v. Puig
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 125 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"(1) The paramount consideration in determining to whom custody should be granted is always the welfare of the children. (2) The general rule is that it is in the best interest of the children of the marriage to grant custody to the mother, especially when they are of tender years. Such paramount right of the mother to custody should not be denied unless she is morally unfit or otherwise unsuitable, and it is only in exceptional cases that the better interest of the children is served by changing their custody from the mother to the father. (3) When the trial court has made a considered decree of permanent custody in the light of the above principles, even though such custody is subject to modification at any time when a change of conditions demands it, the party seeking the change bears a heavy burden of proving that the continuation of the present custody is so deleterious to the children as to justify removing them from the environment to which they are accustomed. (4) Upon appellate review, the determination of the trial judge in child custody matters is entitled to great weight. He is in a better position to evaluate the best interests of the children from his total overview of the conduct and character of the parties and the children and of community standards. His discretion on the issue will not be disturbed on review in the absence of a clear showing of abuse thereof." 254 So.2d at 605 (citations omitted). See also Estes v. Estes, 261 La. 20 , 258 So.2d 857 (1972); A”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage“"[3] Further, an appellate court must give great weight to the trial court's considered determination of custody. If the trial court decides which parent should best have custody for the children's sake after it has applied correct principles of law, a reviewing court should disturb such custody determination only where there is a clear abuse of the trial court's discretion in the matter, even though reasonable minds might differ as to the children's best interest under the variant circumstances suggested by a particular record."”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage““The mother’s temporary inability to care for them due to economic distress did not transform her into an unworthy parent nor alter her custody as being in the ultimate best interest of these young children. “It is true that stability in environment is an important value, so that a party seeking to change a considered determination of the permanent custody of children bears a heavy burden to justify such change as being in their best interest. Nevertheless, here, both parents and children realized at the time of the 1966 change of custody that it was temporary only.””
4 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.