Ohm v. Ohm’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
May 1988
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Marriage of Pikula v. Pikula · Brauer v. Brauer
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“under Minn.Stat. § 518.17, subd. 3 (1986). In considering the best interests of a child, the court is to consider all relevant factors, including those enumerated in the statute. See Pikula v. Pikula, 374 N.W.2d 705, 710-11 (Minn.1985). The factors in section 518.17, subd. 1, require that when both parents seek custody of a child too young to express a preference for a particular parent and one parent has been the”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“custody is to be awarded to the primary parent absent a showing that the primary parent is unfit to be the custodian. Id. at 712 ; Ohm v. Ohm, 393 N.W.2d 411, 413 (Minn.Ct.App.1986). Pikula defines the primary caretaker as”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.