Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 542 So. 2d 447 - Johnson v. Denton

542 So. 2d 447 - Johnson v. Denton’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
September 2005
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently September 2005

4 state decisions

40198919902000decided

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 In Re the Appeal in Pima County Juvenile Action No. J-78632 · State Ex Rel. Department of Human Services v. Avinger · 46 Wash. App. 493 - In Re Thorensen · 442 So. 2d 1094 - Nussbaumer v. Nussbaumer · 467 So. 2d 336 - De La Pena v. Torrone

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

  1. “The trial court should have declined to exercise jurisdiction over HRS’s petition for dependency. While the trial court could have issued a temporary order maintaining custody in HRS’s care for a short period of time in the best interests of the child, see Nussbaumer v. Nussbaumer, 442 So.2d 1094 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), the court erred in adjudicating the child dependent and placing the child in the custody of HRS without first requiring the petitioner to comply with the requirements of the UCCJA and then considering whether it should exer cise jurisdiction under the provisions of that act. Because Arkansas had jurisdiction to enter the temporary order changing custody from the mother to the father, this custody order should now be enforced pursuant to section 61.1332, which requires the state to enforce custody decrees of other states....”
    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.