42 Cal. 3d 531 - Burchard v. Garay’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
192 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 192 later decisions — most recently November 2019 · most notably In Re Marriage of Burgess (1996), 7 Cal. 4th 295 - San Diego County Department of Social Service v. Norma M. (1994)
192 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Stanley v. Illinois · Foster v. Foster · 24 Cal. 3d 725 - In Re Marriage of Carney · 49 Cal. App. 2d 581 - Washburn v. Washburn · 78 Ill. 2d 337 - Jarrett v. Jarrett
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 192 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“regardless of how custody was originally decided upon, after the child has lived in one parent's home for a significant period it surely remains `undesirable' to uproot him from his `established mode of living,' and a substantial change in his circumstances should ordinarily be required to justify that result.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“First, the limited application of the changed-circumstance rule that the majority adopt is in conflict with the primary purpose of this rule. The child whose custody was established by means other than judicial decree has the same need for and right to stability and continuity and accordingly the same entitlement to the protection the rule is intended to provide as the child whose custody was established by judicial decree. Because it is not unreasonable to assume that the children of two-parent and relatively more affluent families are disproportionately represented in the class of children whose custody was originally established by judicial decree, the majority's holding, I fear, will effectively deny needed protection disproportionately to children of single-parent and less affluent families. Second, most states including, until today, California appear to require "changed circumstances" to modify custody regardless of how custody was originally established. [Citation omitted.] The rationale for this position was explained in [ In re Marriage of ] Carney [1979, 24 Cal.3d 725 , 157 Cal. Rptr. 383 , 598 P.2d 36 ]: "regardless of how custody was originally decided upon, after the child has lived in one parent's home for a significant period it surely remains `undesirable' to uproot him from his `established mode of living,' and a substantial change in his circumstances should ordinarily be required to justify that result." [Citation omitted.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[the] change must be substantial: a child will not be removed from the prior custody of one parent and given to the other `unless the material facts and circumstances occurring subsequently are of a kind to render it essential or expedient for the welfare of the child that there be a change.' [Citation.] The reasons for the rule are clear: `It is well established that the courts are reluctant to order a change of custody and will not do so except for imperative reasons; that it is desirable that there be an end of litigation and undesirable to change the child's established mode of living.' [Citation.] [f ] Moreover, although a request for a change of custody is also addressed in the first instance to the sound discretion of the trial judge, he must exercise that discretion in light of the important policy considerations just mentioned. For this reason appellate courts have been less reluctant to find an abuse of discretion when custody is changed than when it is originally awarded, and reversals of such orders have not been uncommon.”
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.