Gibbs v. Gibbs’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably 903 So. 2d 928 - Wade v. Hirschman (2005), 854 So. 2d 262 - Cooper v. Gress (2003)
39 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 542 So. 2d 1330 - In re Amendment to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191 · Frazier v. Frazier · Amendments to Rule of Jud. Admin. 2.051 · 678 So. 2d 1271 - Beagle v. Beagle · 649 So. 2d 230 - Ocean Village Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Brooks
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“change in custody will so clearly promote or improve the child's well-being to such an extent that any reasonable parent would understand that maintaining the status quo would be detrimental to the child's overall best interests.”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage“Although it may be ideal to change the custodial parent for a particular child at some stage in his or her development, the best interests test is not intended to allow the court to micromanage a child's custody from the entry of the final judgment until the child becomes an adult. Even in cases of divorce, these decisions should usually be made by the parents in private. The court must trust that even divorced parents usually want what is best for their children and have far greater ability to assess the interests of the child than does a judge who intervenes in the decision-making process for only a few hours.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“trial court may not modify visitation unless the party moving for such modification demonstrates: (1) a substantial or material change in the circumstances of the parties since the entry of the custody and visitation order, and (2) that the welfare of the child will be promoted by a change in custody and visitation.”
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.