Holick v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
409 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 409 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably In the Interest of M.S. (2003), In Re DT (2001)
409 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler))
Relationships
Relies on Santosky v. Kramer · Stanley v. Illinois · Trammel v. United States · In the Interest of G. M. · Wiley v. Spratlan
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 409 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]ermination proceedings should be strictly scrutinized, and involuntary termination statutes are strictly construed in favor of the parent.”
35 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) that the parent has: [[Image here]] (D) knowingly placed or knowingly allowed the child to remain in conditions or surroundings which endanger the physical or emotional well-being of the child; [or] (E) engaged in conduct or knowingly placed the child with persons who engaged in conduct which endangers the physical or emotional well-being of the child; [[Image here]] and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child.”
17 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) the parent has a mental or emotional illness or mental deficiency that renders the parent unable to provide for the physical, emotional, and mental needs of the child; (2) the illness or deficiency,- in all reasonable probability, proved by clear and convincing evidence, will continue to render the parent unable to provide for the child’s needs until the 18th birthday of the child; (3) the department has been the temporary. or sole managing conservator of the child of the parent for at least six months preceding the date of the hearing on the termination[;] (4) the department has made reasonable efforts to return the child to the parent; and (5) the termination is in the best interest of the child.”
4 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.