408 N.J. Super. 25 - Crespo v. Crespo’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
29
cited by 29 later decisions
3
states following
June 2016
most recently cited
29 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Morrissey v. Brewer · Santosky v. Kramer · Addington v. Texas · District of Columbia v. Heller
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This ease brings into sharp focus the need for this [c]ourt to pick up where the [clourt left off in Crespo v. Crespo, 408 N.J.Super. 25, 45 [ 972 A.2d 1169 ] (App.Div.2009), aff'd [o.b.,] 201 N.J. 207 1989 A.2d 827 ] (2010), and find that “the imposition of a restraining order of the scope authorized by the Act constitutes a matter of sufficient magnitude to warrant the appointment of counsel[.]””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. D.N. v. K.M.“does not expressly refer to the right to due process of law[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.