Deweese v. Crawford’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently November 2007 · most notably Lassiter v. Bliss (1977), In Re Custody of Smith (2000)
30 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Wagner v. Riske · Landry v. Travelers Insurance Company · Odell v. Lutz · Succession of Reiss · Spradlin v. Rosebud Feed & Grain Co.
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) If a managing conservator is appointed, the court may appoint one or more possessory conservators and set the time and conditions for possession of or access to the child by the possessory conservators and others. “(b) On the appointment of a possesso-ry conservator, the court shall prescribe the rights, privileges, duties, and powers of the possessory conservator. “(c) The court may not deny possession of or access to a child to either or both parents unless it finds that parental pos session or access is not in the best interest of the child and that parental possession or access would endanger the physical or emotional welfare of the child. “(d) If the court finds that it is in the best interests of the child as provided in Section 14.07 of this code, the court may grant reasonable access rights to either the maternal or paternal grandparents of the child; and to either the natural maternal or paternal grandparents of a child whose parent-child relationship has been terminated or who has been adopted before or after the effective date of this code. Such relief shall not be granted unless one of the child’s legal parents at the time the relief is requested is the child’s natural parent. The court may issue any necessary orders to enforce said decree.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dolman v. Dolman“We have held that . . . appellees’ rights as ‘paternal grandparents’ have been terminated in law. As a practical matter, however, these children are and will remain the appellees’ beloved grandchildren. We do not mean to suggest that they could not conduct themselves in the future in such a manner as to justify an injunction against them. The point is that they have not done so. While parents are entitled to exercise parental control of the whereabouts, custody and upbringing of their children, they are not thereby entitled to infringe upon appellees’ rights. The appellees have attended public meetings and traveled public streets in the hope of seeing their grandchildren. This conduct is neither improper nor illegal. Upon the basis of the evidence presented, there is insufficient grounds for injunctive relief against the Crawfords. 520 S.W.2d at 527 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Koehler v. Koehler“The request for findings of fact and conclusions of law, as well as the subsequent complaint for failure to file under Rule 297, must be presented to the judge. Merely filing the request and complaint with the clerk is insufficient.”
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.