33 Md. App. 295 - Davis v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
January 1978
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Hild v. Hild · 12 Md. App. 1 - Sullivan v. Auslaender · Pangle v. Pangle · 31 Md. App. 58 - Sartoph v. Sartoph · Krebs v. Krebs
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Gentlemen, I have, of course, heard all of the testimony in connection with the original trial of this case, which consumed a couple of days, and I have had the benefit of reviewing that transcript, and I have had the benefit of our custodial investigation in connection with the three children. It's obvious to me that Mr. Davis can and has provided an adequate or even more than adequate home for the two older children, and certainly on the basis of their latest report cards, and the custodial investigation report they are doing well with him. It's equally obvious to me that Mrs. Davis is able to and has been providing an adequate home for the youngest daughter, Leigh. It's quite obvious to me that she would be unable to remain where she is if the Court awarded her custody of all three of the children, but I don't intend to do that, so it's not necessary to really even discuss that aspect of the case. The primary concern of the Court in this particular case has been the younger child, Leigh, who has been with her mother, and as to whether that should be at least a temporary, permanent arrangement, or whether the custody should be changed to the father. Being aware of the law in reference to the adultery of the mother and the presumptions that arise from it, at the same time we must consider that the law in the State of Maryland is, and has been for some time, that the best interests of the child is the paramount consideration that the Court should consider. The present situati”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Davis v. Davis“that the chancellor was erroneous in his determination that the best interest of the child required that custody be continued in the mother.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Davis v. Davis“an appellate court ... must exercise its own good judgment as to whether the conclusion of the chancellor is the best one,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Davis v. Davis
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.