Ganz v. Rust’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 2010
10 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1738A
Relies on Durfee v. Duke · Thompson v. Thompson · Brooklier v. United States · Neger v. Neger · E. E. B. v. D. A.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is in the best interest of the child that a court of this State assume jurisdiction because (i) the child and his parents, or the child and at least one contestant, have a significant connection with this State, and (ii) there is available in this State substantial evidence concerning the child's present or future care, protection, training and personal relationships[.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he rationale for the Legislature's adoption of the UCCJA appears in Ivaldi , ... holding that the Act applies to an international child custody dispute and remanding that case to the trial court to determine whether New Jersey or Morocco provides a more appropriate forum. In so ruling, the Supreme Court described "the central policy of the Act's jurisdictional provisions ... to assure that custody litigation occurs in the place where the child and his or her family have the closest connection." [ Ganz v. Rust, 299 N.J.Super. 324, 335 , 690 A. 2d 1113 (App.Div.1997) (quoting Ivaldi 147 N.J. at 198 , 685 A. 2d 1319 .)]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“"Home state" means the state in which a child lived with a parent or a person acting as a parent for at least six consecutive months immediately before the commencement of a child custody proceeding. In the case of a child less than six months of age, the term means the state in which the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned. A period of temporary absence of any of the mentioned persons is part of the period.”
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.