660 So. 2d 986 - Ex Parte Lipscomb’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Kelm v. Kelm (2001), C.R.B. v. C.C. (1998)
27 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 Ex Parte Handley · State ex rel. Speer v. Haynes · 545 So. 2d 780 - Deal v. Deal
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.
“"The circuit court's jurisdiction to [decide custody] is derived from the principles of equity; where a child is physically present within the jurisdiction of a circuit court in this state, the court has inherent authority to act to protect the welfare and best interests of the child. [ Ex parte] Handley [, 460 So.2d 167 (Ala. 1984] ). A party need not specifically invoke the circuit court's inherent jurisdiction; rather, any pleading showing on its face that the welfare of a child requires an order with respect to its custody and support is sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of the circuit court to settle the matter. Handley . Once the circuit court's jurisdiction is thus invoked, any matter affecting a child may become the subject of its adjudication. Handley ."”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““(a) The juvenile court shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction of proceedings in which a child is alleged to be delinquent, dependent or in need of supervision. “(b) The court shall also exercise exclusive original jurisdiction of the following proceedings, which shall be governed by the laws relating thereto: “(1) Proceedings to determine custody ... of a child when the child is otherwise before the court. This provision, however, shall not be construed to deprive other courts of the right to determine the custody ... of children when such custody ... is incidental to the determination of cases pending in those courts.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Hornbuckle v. Hornbuckle · Jt v. Ac“[u]pon granting a divorce, the court may give the custody ... of the children of the marriage to either father or mother, as may seem right and proper,”
2 later decisions 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.