445 So. 2d 1380 - Marascalco v. Marascalco’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably 859 So. 2d 1006 - Johnson v. Gray (2003), 677 So. 2d 740 - Riley v. Doerner (1996)
31 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 437 So. 2d 1003 - Albright v. Albright · Culbreath v. Johnson · 431 So. 2d 1139 - Cheek v. Ricker · Harris v. Bailey Avenue Park, Inc. · Eggleston v. Landrum, Et Ux.
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Above all, in `modification cases, as in original awards of custody, we never depart from our polestar consideration: the best interest and welfare of the child.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“[F]indings of fact made by a chancellor may not be set aside or disturbed upon appeal if they are supported by substantial, credible evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The law with regard to a modification of a decree for child custody is well-settled. There are two basic prerequisites: First, the moving party must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that, since entry of the judgment or decree sought to be modified, there has been a material change in circumstances which adversely affects the welfare of the child. Second, if such an adverse change has been shown, the moving party must show by like evidence that the best interest of the child requires the change of custody.... Yet not every change in circumstances warrants a change in custody. The "totality of the circumstances" must be considered.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lipsey v. Lipsey
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.