453 Pa. Super. 324 - Gancas v. Schultz’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
51 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently February 2010 · most notably Latimer v. Farmer (2004), 1999 Pa. Super. 249 - Thomas v. Thomas (1999)
51 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 400 Pa. Super. 174 - Gruber v. Gruber · 394 Pa. Super. 30 - Zummo v. Zummo · In Re Davis · 409 Pa. Super. 143 - Plowman v. Plowman · 406 Pa. Super. 487 - Lee v. Fontine
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the potential advantages of the proposed move, economic or otherwise; (2) the likelihood the move would improve substantially the quality of life for the custodial parent and the children and is not the result of a whim on the part of the custodial parent; (3) the integrity of the motives of both the custodial and noncustodial parent in seeking the move or seeking to prevent it; (4) and the availability of realistic substitute visitation arrangements that will adequately foster an ongoing relationship between the child and the noncustodial parent.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Latimer v. Farmer · Beers v. Beers“the polestar of our analysis in this case, just as it was in Gruber and a legion of prior custody cases, remains the best interests of the child.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“1. The court must assess the potential advantages of the proposed move and the likelihood that the move would substantially improve the quality of life for the custodial parent and the children and is not a momentary whim on the part of the custodial parent ... 2. Next, the court must establish the integrity of the motives of both the custodial and the non-eustodial parent in either seeking the move or seeking to prevent it ... 3. Finally, the court must consider the availability of realistic, substitute visitation arrangements which will adequately foster an ongoing relationship between the child and the non-custodial parent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Beers v. Beers
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.