Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 526 S.W.2d 33 - Johnson v. Johnson

Johnson v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
3
states following
December 1994
most recently cited

42 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently December 1994 · most notably L. H. Y. v. J. M. Y. (1976), In Re Marriage of Burham (1979)

42 state decisions

250197519801990decided

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 Hild v. Hild · L_E_(S_) v. J_A_E · M____ L v. M____ R · C v. B · Lutker v. Lutker

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

  1. ““The court shall determine custody in accordance with the best interests of the child. The court shall consider all relevant factors including: (1) The wishes of the child’s parents as to his custody; (2) The wishes of the child as to his custodian; (3) The interaction and interrelationship of the child with his parents, his siblings, and any other person who may significantly affect the child’s best interests; (4) The child’s adjustment to his home, school, and community; and (5) The mental and physical health of all individuals involved.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““We agree that such a presumption [in favor of the mother] exists, but we do not find it to be conclusive. Each case must be decided on its own facts. In Brand v. Brand, 441 S.W.2d 750 (Mo.App.1969), there was no evidence that either parent was unfit. The court awarded custody of the children to the father despite the presumption in favor of the mother’s care. The court held that where the evidence did not preponderate in favor of either party the trial court is vested with broad discretion in awarding custody under such circumstances.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.