Keesee v. Keesee’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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. “These experts conduct interviews, sometimes do tests and then are allowed to render opinions on an extraordinary range of subjects. They have been allowed to offer opinions on why a child nestles with its parent (no, it's not necessarily love), whether someone is prone to domestic violence, who is telling the truth and who is "in denial." Yet, no one seems to be able to muster any measure of the competence or the reliability of these opinions. On the one hand, it is certainly desirable to bring before the court as much evidence as possible to assist the trial court in making the best decision concerning the raising of children in families torn by divorce. On the other hand, rules of evidence exist for a reason, and the issue of competency of such a broad reach of expert testimony is not something that should be taken lightly—particularly in such cases where there is frequently little other objective or disinterested evidence on which the court can rely. These psychological evaluations in many cases amount to no more than an exercise in human lie detection.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 816 So. 2d 714 - Spano v. Bruce

2. “The party who seeks to challenge a trial court's initial custody decision in a contested custody case carries a heavy burden. Where the testimony is in conflict, the trial court must resolve all factual disputes.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 724 So. 2d 1255 - Keitel v. Keitel