Freeman v. Rushton’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably 97 Ark. App. 267 - Arkansas Department of Health & Human Services v. Jones (2007), Devine v. Martens (2007)
32 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
Relies on Michael v. Gerald D · Linder v. Linder · Blunt v. Cartwright · Stamps v. Rawlins · Stamps v. Rawlins
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is the trial court’s discretion to make a determination whether a parent is “qualified” and “suitable.” See Ark. Code Ann. § 28-65-204 (a). Assuming such a determination is made, however, the analysis does not end there. This statute does not mandate appoint,ment. It merely states that such a parent “shall be preferred over all others for appointment as guardian.” Id. We must assume that had the General Assembly intended to require appointment, it would have stated that a parent who is qualified and suitable shall be appointed as guardian. This statute does not do that. This statute merely grants a preference and does not negate the trial judge’s discretion to weigh all of the facts before him and to determine the credibility of the witnesses in making his determination of guardianship.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Smith v. Thomas“We review probate proceedings de novo, but we will not reverse a finding of fact by the circuit court unless it is clearly erroneous. A finding is clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. When reviewing the proceedings, we give due regard to the opportunity and superior position of the probate judge to determine the credibility of the witnesses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Graham v. Matheny“The natural-parent preference referred to by appellant derives from our long-established caselaw in custody matters and from Ark.Code Ann. § 28-65-204(a). While the two preferences are similar, the preference at issue here is the statutory preference, Ark. Code Ann. § 28-65 -20I(a).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Fletcher v. Scorza
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.