Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 796 N.W.2d 636 - Schumacker v. Schumacker

Schumacker v. Schumacker’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
November 2022
most recently cited

27 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Matter of Estate of Stanton · Kelly v. Kelly · DUFNER v. Trottier · Tank v. Tank · Green v. Green

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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a. On the basis of facts that have arisen since the prior order or which were unknown to the court at the time of the prior order, a material change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or the parties; and b. The modification is necessary to serve the best interests of the child.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The court may not modify the primary residential responsibility within the two-year period following the date of entry of an order establishing primary residential responsibility unless the court finds the modification is necessary to serve the best interest of the child and: a. The persistent and willful denial or interference with parenting time; b. The child’s present environment may endanger the child’s physical or emotional health or impair the child’s emotional development; or c. The residential responsibility for the child has changed to the other parent for longer than six months.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The state-of-mind exception generally excludes a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed.... The hearsay rule would effectively be destroyed if statements indicating a state of mind were admissible to infer the happening of the event which produced the state of mind; consequently, such statements are inadmissible. It has also been held that the state-of[-]mind exception allows only for the admission of statements showing the de-clarant’s state of mind, not statements explaining the declarant’s state of mind.”
    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.