Foster v. Foster’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 2006
12 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 Porter v. Crawford & Co. · In Re the Marriage of Cook · In Re the Marriage of Johanson · In Re the Marriage of Goodrich · Titze v. Cunningham
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The legislature enacted § 452.370, RSMo.Supp.1983, to impose a more strict standard for modification to discourage recurrent and insubstantial motions for modification.... While we are unwilling to adopt a fixed rule as to the length of time that a party must wait before attempting to modify a prior decree or modification, if it is a short period of time there must be an allegation of some extraordinary change in circumstances to trigger relief. The alleged changes must be more than the expected and predictable increases in the children’s general expenses since it is presumed that such factors were taken into account in making the original award or prior modification.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Spaeth v. Spaeth
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.