Wall v. Wall’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently November 2023
8 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 Kallas v. Kallas · Jorgensen v. Jorgensen · Boals v. Boals
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The trial court is afforded particularly broad discretion in the area of child custody. A determination of the “best interests of the child” turns on factors which the trial court is best able to assess, and only when the action taken by the trial court is so unjust as to constitute an abuse of discretion should this Court substitute its own judgment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“frequently turns on numerous factors which the trial court is best suited to assess, given its proximity to the parties and the cireumstances. Only where trial court action is so flagrantly unjust as to constitute an abuse of discretion should the appellate forum interpose its own judgment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Doyle v. Doyle
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.