414 Pa. Super. 372 - In Re MT’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently January 2024 · most notably 431 Pa. Super. 588 - Smith v. Smith (1993), In Re BLL (2001)
39 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 In Re William L. · Eckman v. Commonwealth · Beatty v. Lycoming County Children's Services · 407 Pa. Super. 404 - Gemini Equipment Co. v. Pennsy Supply, Inc. · McCormick v. Northeastern Bank
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The purpose of the statutory requirement... [i]s to guarantee that the needs and welfare of the children w[ill] be advanced actively by an advocate whose loyalty [is] owed exclusively to them.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“§ 2511. Grounds for involuntary termination (a) General rule. — The rights of a parent in regard to a child may be terminated after a petition filed on any of the following grounds: (8) The child has been removed from the care of the parent by the court or under a voluntary agreement with an agency, 12 months or more have elapsed from the date of removal or placement, the conditions which led to the removal or placement of the child continue to exist and termination of parental rights would best serve the needs and welfare of the child. (b) Other considerations. — The court in terminating the rights of a parent shall give primary consideration to the developmental, physical and emotional needs and welfare of the child. The rights of a parent shall not be terminated solely on the basis of environmental factors such as inadequate housing, furnishings, income, clothing and medical care if found to be beyond the control of the parent. With respect to any petition filed pursuant to subsection (a)(1), (6) or (8), the court shall not consider any efforts by the parent to remedy the conditions described therein which are first initiated subsequent to the giving of notice of the filing of the petition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“appellant shall order any transcript required____’’ Therefore, it was incumbent upon Frank Matsock’s attorney to have a transcript of the October 29, 1989 hearing made part of the record. As this court recently stated: While we recognize that appellant is proceeding in forma pauperis, she has been represented by court-appointed counsel throughout the entire termination proceedings, and despite her indigent status, “it is nonetheless appellant’s responsibility to order the transcript required and ascertain its presence in the record prior to certification for appeal”
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.