Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 679 A2D 86 - In Re Ashley A.

In Re Ashley A.’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
December 2019
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently December 2019

14 state decisions

80199620002010decided

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 In Re Serena C. · In Re Leona T. · In Re Jason B.

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

  1. “(1) [t]he parent is unwilling or unable to protect the child from jeopardy and these circumstances are unlikely to change within a time which is reasonably calculated to meet the child’s needs; (ii) [t]he parent has been unwilling or unable. to take responsibility for the child within a time which is reasonably calculated to meet the child’s needs; (iii) [t]he child has been abandoned; or (iv) [t]he parent has failed to make a good faith effort to rehabilitate and reunify with the child pursuant to section 4041.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[a]lthough a finding of parental unfitness and a finding of best interests of the child[ren] are two separate elements, the court may consider the findings of parental unfitness as relevant to best interests. For example, the parent's inability to protect the child[ren] from jeopardy is relevant to the child[ren]'s best interests.”
    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.