Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 427 Pa. Super. 79 - In Re Jeffrey S.

427 Pa. Super. 79 - In Re Jeffrey S.’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
July 2014
most recently cited

15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently July 2014

15 state decisions

100199320002010decided

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 375 Pa. Super. 88 - In the Interest of Justin S. · 418 Pa. Super. 359 - In Re SM · 267 Pa. Super. 428 - In Re Jackson · 302 Pa. Super. 369 - Matter of Jackson · 351 Pa. Super. 342 - In Interest of Anita H.

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

  1. “as one who is without proper parental care or control, subsistence, education as required by law, or other care or control necessary for his physical, mental, or emotional health or morals. A determination that there is a lack of proper parental care or control may be based upon evidence of conduct by the parent, guardian or other custodian that places the health, safety or welfare of the child at risk,.... Id. at § 6302,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. In Re RT
  2. “`Whether a child is lacking proper care and control encompasses two discrete questions: (1) Is the child at this moment without proper care or control? and (2) If so, is such care and control immediately available?'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. In Re RT

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.