Byzewski v. Byzewski’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently December 2016
21 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
Applies 25 U.S.C. § 1302 (§ 202 of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968) · 25 U.S.C. § 1321 · 28 U.S.C. § 1360 · 28 U.S.C. § 1738A
Relies on Morton v. Mancari · Kulko v. Superior Court of California in and for City and County of San Francisco · Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez · Williams v. Lee · Williams v. State of North Carolina
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"This case is between enrolled members of Three Affiliated Tribes to determine the paternity of an Indian child living with her mother on the Indian reservation. V.G. denied paternity but, alternatively, alleged that `the events and alleged paternity' occurred on the reservation. There is nothing in this record to contradict the allegation that `paternity' occurred on the reservation. Three Affiliated Tribes has not consented to the exercise of state court jurisdiction."”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“while resembling in some respects a sufficient contacts test for ascertaining personal jurisdiction, is actually a rule for gauging whether a court has subject matter jurisdiction over the action itself. Furthermore, contacts within the state but off the reservation, which might arguably suffice to grant a court personal jurisdiction over an Indian domiciled on a reservation, are not necessarily sufficient to grant the court subject matter under the infringement test.”
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.