Smith v. Watson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

23 state decisions

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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]here a parent, without just cause or excuse, forsakes or deserts his infant child for such a length of time, and under such circumstances, as to show an intent to shirk or evade the duty, trouble or expense of rearing it, or a callous indifference to its wants, or a reckless disregard for its welfare, he or she is guilty of such abandonment of it as to bar his or her right thereafter to reclaim its custody from any person who may have ministered to and protected it during such period of desertion.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brown v. Wiley · 902 So. 2d 604 - In Re Guardianship of Brown

2. “[g]enerally, when prior proceedings conducted by another court determined the custody of an infant, the prior judgment must be regarded as final, and it is not subject to attack by subsequent habeas corpus proceedings.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 842 So. 2d 1287 - Helmert v. Biffany · 471 So. 2d 1213 - Wade v. Lee

3. “Generally, when prior proceedings conducted by another court determined the custody of an infant, the prior judgment must be regarded as final, and it is not subject to attack by subsequent habeas corpus proceedings. However, the habeas corpus court can disregard the prior decree where circumstances and conditions arising since the decree show that the party awarded custody is unfit to exercise or has abandoned custody of the child.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 600 So. 2d 951 - Bubac v. Boston