Klecker v. Klecker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(d) * * * the court shall not modify a prior custody order unless it finds, upon the basis of facts that have arisen since the prior order or that were unknown to the court at the time of the prior order, that a change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or the parties and that the modification is necessary to serve the best interest of the child. In applying these standards the court shall retain the custody arrangement established by the prior order unless: $ * * sjc # ⅝ (iii) the child’s present environment endangers the child’s physical or emotional health or impairs the child’s emotional development and the harm likely to be caused by a change of environment is outweighed by the advantage of a change to the child.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Elgard v. Dudley · Marriage of Dabrowski v. Dabrowski

2. “We agree with the observation of the Sydnes court that in cases of actual joint physical custody, the focus must remain where the legislature placed it: on the best interests of the minor child as those best interests may be determined by application of section 518.17.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Elgard v. Dudley

3. “the inherent inconsistency in applying Minn.Stat. § 518.18(d) to a joint physical custody arrangement where neither parent is, in fact, the primary physical custodian * * *.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Elgard v. Dudley