Wetch v. Wetch’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably Riverwood Commercial Park, L.L.C. v. Standard Oil Co. (2007), Kelly v. Kelly (2002)
32 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 29 Wis. 2d 145 - Wendland v. Wendland · Hofsommer v. Hofsommer Excavating, Inc. · 94 Wash. 2d 594 - In Re the Marriage of Timmons · 27 Ill. App. 3d 913 - Randolph v. Dean · Weber v. Weber
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Res judicata, or claim preclusion, prohibits the relitigation of claims or issues that were raised or could have been raised in a prior action between the same parties or their privies, and which were resolved by final judgment in a court of competent jurisdiction. Under res judicata principles, it is inappropriate to rehash issues which were tried or could have been tried by the court in prior proceedings.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“1. For the purpose of custody, the best interests and welfare of the child is determined by the court’s consideration and evaluation of all factors affecting the best interests and welfare of the child. These factors include all of the following when applicable: ‡ ⅜ ⅜ $ ⅜ ⅜ j. Evidence of domestic violence. In awarding custody or granting rights of visitation, the court shall consider evidence of domestic violence. If the court finds credible evidence that domestic violence has occurred, and there exists one incident of domestic violence which resulted in serious bodily injury or involved the use of a dangerous weapon or there exists a pattern of domestic violence within a reasonable time proximate to the proceeding, this combination creates a rebuttable presumption that a parent who has perpetrated domestic violence may not be awarded sole or joint custody of a child. This presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence that the best interests of the child require that parent’s participation as a custodial parent. The court shall cite specific findings of fact to show that the custody or visitation arrangement best protects the child and the parent or other family or household member who is the victim of domestic violence. If necessary to protect the welfare of the child, custody may be awarded to a suitable third person, provided that the person would not allow access to a violent parent except as ordered by the court. If the court awards custody to a thir”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Carver v. Miller · Kraft v. Kraft“In deciding a change of [primary residential responsibility] motion, if the previous [primary residential responsibility] placement was based upon the parties’ ■ stipulation and not by consideration of the. evidence and court made findings, the trial court must consider all relevant evidence, including pre-divorce conduct and activities, in making a considered and appropriate [primary residential responsibility] decision in the best interests of the children.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Topolski v. Topolski
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.