Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 394 SW2D 78 - Ritter v. Ritter

Ritter v. Ritter’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
March 1992
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 1992

4 state decisions

201965197019801990decided

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 Creamer v. Bivert · In Re Adoption of P. J. K. · Paxton v. Paxton · Jourdan v. Jourdan · R v. E

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.

  1. ““A statement which does not afford the appellate court an immediate, complete, and unbiased understanding of the facts and which does not fairly present the facts is pernicious in that it conveys in the first instance a distorted and imperfect impression. It renders the appeal subject to dismissal. In re Adoption of P. J. K., Mo.App., 359 S.W.2d 360, 363 ; Glick v. Glick, Mo.App., 360 S.W.2d 333, 335 ; Markowitz v. University City, Mo. App., 335 S.W.2d 455 . We consider the appeal subject to dismissal; but the custody (and hence the welfare) of infant children is involved, and for that reason we waive the rule”.”
    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.