3 Ariz. App. 138 - Bailey v. Bailey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

45 state decisions

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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The one who seeks to modify a decree has the burden of proof. Andro v. Andro, 97 Ariz. 302 , 400 P.2d 105 (1965). The petitioner must show changed circumstances effecting the welfare of the child. Ward v. Ward, 88 Ariz. 130 , 353 P.2d 895 (1960), modified as to other matters on rehearing, 88 Ariz. 285 , 356 P.2d 30 (1960), Galbraith v. Galbraith, 88 Ariz. 358 , 356 P.2d 1023 (1960), Smith v. Smith, 90 Ariz. 190 , 367 P.2d 230 (1961). Upon a showing being made, the trial court exercises its sound judicial discretion. Ward . The order which it is sought to change is final upon the facts which were before the court at the time of the entry of the order. Ward . The primary consideration is the welfare of the child. Ward; Galbraith. The Court will look to the best interests of the child and not to the gratification of the parents. Galbraith. The interests of the parents are worthy of consideration. Ward . * * * The determination of the trial judge must be supported by the evidence and if it is so supported, it will not be set aside and it is the absence of such support, which constitutes an abuse of discretion. Ward; Galbraith. The trial judge is in the best position to determine the issues. Galbraith; Smith; Andro.” Bailey v. Bailey, 3 Ariz.App. 138 , 412 P.2d 480, 483 (1966).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 4 Ariz. App. 83 - Hoffman v. Hoffman

2. ““Frequently these conferences are conducted with a promise by the trial judge that the information is confidential, that the child need not repeat what has been said and the judge will not repeat what has been said. It is vital that this confidence be observed. “In this, one of the most difficult responsibilities of a trial judge, the judge is privileged to consider the information so secured in his final decision. The information given to the trial judge during the in chambers conference may well be the crucial and determining factor in the court’s decision. We do not say that if the record is overwhelming in favor of one decision that the in chambers conference alone will be sufficient to sustain a contrary finding for that problem is not before us. In this case, the reported evidence sustains the decision and we must assume that the decision is fortified and strengthened by the in chambers conference.” Bailey v. Bailey, (1966), 3 Ariz. App. 138, 142 , 412 P. 2d 480, 484 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Blue v. Brooks

3. ““... However, it is seldom that a court, in an uncontested hearing, will make a child custody determination which differs from the language of the agreement signed by the parents. Even though the judgment which results proves to be not to the best interest of the child, the orders which confirm the stipulations and agreements are as binding as are those which are entered by the court based upon its own determination after a full hearing. This is illustrated by Cone . Temporary expediency at the time of the entry of the decree of divorce often dictates the terms of the agreement including, but not limited to, the provisions in relation to child custody.” 3 Ariz.App. at 141 , 412 P.2d 480 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lowther v. Hooker