Julius v. Julius’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Olds v. Donnelly · 242 N.J. Super. 392 - D'Atria v. D'Atria · 42 N.J. Super. 243 - Roach v. Margulies · 77 N.J. Super. 497 - Lippmann v. Hydro-Space Technology, Inc. · 242 N.J. Super. 567 - Culp v. Culp
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an apparently intelligent party, [but he] exhibited patterns of behavior . . . which were reasonably interpreted by the trial judge as either deliberately obstructive or the result of psychological stress or disease. . . . The circumstances clearly warranted appointment of someone who would enable the litigation to move forward while protecting defendant's interests.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he function of a guardian ad litem is only to protect the interests of the ward in respect of the litigation, while taking substantive actions on behalf of the ward is the proper function of his guardian of person or property.”
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.