Johnson v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1946
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently March 1964
22 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 Foster v. Foster · 16 Cal. 2d 190 - Prouty v. Prouty · 49 Cal. App. 2d 581 - Washburn v. Washburn · Crater v. Crater · 95 Cal. App. 594 - Olson v. Olson
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The paramount consideration in determining the custody of a child is the welfare of the child. The feelings and desires of the parents are not to be considered except as they may be found to affect the interests of the child. To justify a modification of an order for custody of a minor child there must be a change of circumstances arising after the original decree was entered (Olson v. Olson, 95 Cal.App. 594, 597 [ 272 P. 1113 ]; Foster v. Foster, 8 Cal.2d 719, 726 [ 68 P.2d 719 ]), and until a change of circumstances occurs which makes a modification of the former custodial order advisable from the consideration of the welfare of the child, the court will refuse to make any modification thereof. (Citing authorities.)”
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.