708 So. 2d 731 - Evans v. Lungrin’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
396 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 396 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Aeb v. Jbe (1999), McGlothlin v. Christus St. Patrick Hospital (2011)
396 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 549 So. 2d 840 - Rosell v. Esco · 492 So. 2d 1193 - Bergeron v. Bergeron · 650 So. 2d 742 - Ferrell v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. · 625 So. 2d 1002 - Lasha v. Olin Corp. · Ferrell v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co.
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 396 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Legal errors are prejudicial when they materially affect the outcome and deprive a party of substantial rights.”
60 later decisions quote this exact passage“so deleterious to the child as to justify a modification of the custody decree,”
30 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) The love, affection, and other emotional ties between each party and the child. (2) The capacity and disposition of each party to give the child love, affection, and spiritual guidance and to continue the education and rearing of the child. (3) The capacity and disposition of each party to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care, and other material needs. (4) The length of time the child has lived in a stable, adequate environment, and the desirability of maintaining continuity of that environment. (5) The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes. (6) The moral fitness of each party, insofar as it affects the welfare of the child. (7) The mental and physical health of each party. (8) The home, school, and community history of the child. (9) The reasonable preference of the child, if the court deems the child to be of sufficient age to express a preference. (10) The willingness and ability of each party to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing relationship between the child and the other party. (11) The distance between the respective residences of the parties. (12) The responsibility for the care and rearing of the child previously exercised by each party.”
28 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.