Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 67 N.C. App. 73 - Dixon v. Dixon

67 N.C. App. 73 - Dixon v. Dixon’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
2
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

55 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably 185 N.C. App. 337 - In Re THT (2007), 190 N.C. App. 209 - Mason v. Dwinnell (2008)

55 state decisions

2801984199020002010decided

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 Crosby v. Crosby · 32 N.C. App. 154 - Montgomery v. Montgomery · Swicegood v. Swicegood · 52 N.C. App. 203 - Falls v. Falls · 36 N.C. App. 601 - Steele v. Steele

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

  1. “[A] custody order is fatally defective where it fails to make detailed findings of fact from which an appellate court can determine that the order is in the best interest of the child, and custody orders are routinely vacated where the “findings of fact” consist of mere conclusory statements that the party being awarded custody is a fit and proper person to have custody and that it will be in the best interest of the child to award custody to that person. A custody order will also be vacated where the findings of fact are too meager to support the award.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Any evidence of child abuse is of the utmost concern in determining whether granting custody to a particular party will best promote the interest and welfare of the child, and it is clear that the findings of fact at bar do not adequately resolve the issue of child abuse raised by the evidence in the record. We do not here imply that the evidence establishes that defendant is currently abusing her child, nor do we hold that any evidence of child abuse means that the abusing parent has permanently forfeited any right to ever gain custody. We do hold, however, that the nature of child abuse, it being such a terrible fate to befall a child, obligates a trial court to resolve any evidence of it in its findings of fact. This was not done and the order is therefore vacated and the case remanded for a new hearing on the issue of custody.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]he findings in a custody order `bearing on the party's fitness to have care, custody, and control of the child and the findings as to the best interests of the child must resolve all questions raised by the evidence pertaining thereto.'”
    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.