Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 711 S.W.2d 492 - Wright v. Howard

Wright v. Howard’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

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

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently March 2019

14 state decisions

701986199020002010decided

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 Santosky v. Kramer · O.S. v. C.F. · Jouett v. Rhorer · Higgason v. Henry · Ds v. Fah

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. “adoption only exists as a right bestowed by statute and, furthermore, ... there must be strict compliance with the adoption statutes. The law of adoption is in derogation of the common law. Nothing can be assumed, presumed, or inferred and what is not found in the statute is a matter for the legislature to supply and not the courts.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “'judgment of adoption' and 'order terminating parental rights' as being one document that comprises the judgment.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “In filing the petition as a dual one for adoption and termination of parental rights, apparently in an attempt to satisfy the requirements of both the adoption statutes and the involuntary termination statute the appellee Howards, as do most others taking this mistaken procedural approach, failed to fulfill [sic] various requirements of the adoption statutes, their only real concern under proper interpretation of KRS 199.500(4) and application of the strict compliance rule, and thereby caused the trial court to enter an invalid judgment.”
    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.