62 Wash. App. 378 - George v. Helliar’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably 122 Wash. 2d 604 - MATTER OF MARRIAGE OF McDOLE (1993), 69 Wash. App. 324 - Matter of Marriage of Olivares (1993)
25 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 90 Wash. 2d 626 - Schuster v. Schuster · 100 Wash. 2d 325 - In Re the Marriage of Cabalquinto · 25 Wash. App. 849 - In Re the Marriage of Roorda · 56 Wash. App. 356 - In the Matter of Custody of Stell · Groves v. Groves
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (4) of this section, the court shall not modify a prior custody decree or a parenting plan unless it finds, upon the basis of facts that have arisen since the prior decree or plan or that were unknown to the court at the time of the prior decree or plan, that a substantial change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or the nonmoving party and that the modification is in the best interest of the child and is necessary to serve the best interests of the child. (2) In applying these standards, the court shall retain the residential schedule established by the decree or parenting plan unless: (b) The child has been integrated into the family of the petitioner with the consent of the other parent in substantial deviation from the parenting plan;”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“[O]n remand, the trial court is to review [the mother's] current situation and conduct any hearings necessary to determine if she is presently a fit parent capable of providing a suitable home for [the child]. . . . [T]he court must focus solely on the suitability of [the mother's] present environment and must return [the child] to [the mother] unless the court makes findings that [the mother] is not a fit parent consistent with RCW 26.09.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(2) In applying these standards, the court shall retain the residential schedule established by the .. . parenting plan unless: ... (c) The child's present environment is detrimental to the child's physical, mental, or emotional health and the harm likely to be caused by a change of environment is outweighed by the advantage of a change to the child ...”
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.