Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 304 Minn. 460 - Rabuse v. Rabuse

Rabuse v. Rabuse’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
3
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2019

8 state decisions

4019751980199020002010decided

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 Dovi v. Dovi · Gale v. Lee · Atwood v. Atwood · Anderson v. Anderson

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

  1. ““It has long been recognized that courts of equity may exercise their jurisdiction for the protection of the persons and estates of infants, even if they are not parties to a litigation. * * * “This jurisdiction is broad, comprehensive, and plenary, and is not confined to cases of a strictly fiduciary character. In all suits or legal proceedings, of whatever nature, in which the personal or property rights of a minor are involved the protective powers of a court of chancery may be invoked whenever it becomes necessary fully to protect such rights.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “enforcement procedure prescribed in the uniform act is clearly not exclusive and is not limited to a proceeding under the act.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “in a proceeding under this chapter or otherwise,”
    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.