In Re RT’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably In Re ALD (2002), In the Interest of H.S.W.C.-B & S.E.C.-B (2003)
33 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 671 (§ 471 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Golden Pacific Bancorp v. United States · Swint v. Chambers County Commission · In re the Primary Election of May 21, 1991 · Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Anthony · Commonwealth v. Craver
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(c.1) Aggravated circumstances.If the county agency or the child's attorney alleges the existence of aggravated circumstances and the court determines that the child is dependent, the court shall also determine if aggravated circumstances exist. If the court finds from clear and convincing evidence that aggravated circumstances exist, the court shall determine whether or not reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need for removing the child from the home or to preserve and reunify the family shall be made or continue to be made and schedule a dispositional hearing as required by section 6351(e)(3) (relating to disposition of dependent child).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“although the polestar of the Juvenile Act is reunification of the family, 55 Pa.Code § 3130.67 lists adoption as a permissible goal for a dependent child. See id. at (b)(9)(iii). See also In the Matter of Luis R., 430 Pa.Super. 518 , 635 A.2d 170 (1993), appeal denied, 538 Pa. 635 , 647 A.2d 511 (1994) (noting permissible goals listed in 55 Pa.Code § 3130.67(b)(9), and explaining that "one goal is not mandated over another; nor does the language of the regulation require that each goal be implemented in the order in which they are listed.").”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“a statute is not regarded as operating retroactively because of the mere fact that it relates to antecedent events, or draws upon antecedent facts for its operation.”
2 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.