Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 801 A.2d 614 - In Re DA

In Re DA’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

60
cited by 60 later decisions
1
states following
September 2025
most recently cited

60 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently September 2025 · most notably In Re RP (2008), In Re SB (2003)

60 state decisions

240200220102020decided

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 Sibron v. State of New York Peters · In Re Gross · 449 Pa. Super. 142 - Erie Insurance Exchange v. Claypoole · 240 Pa. Super. 291 - Janet D. v. Carros · In re M.L.

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

  1. “this Court will decide questions that otherwise have been rendered moot when one or more of the following exceptions to the mootness doctrine apply: 1) the case involves a question of great public importance, 2) the question presented is capable of repetition and apt to elude appellate review, or 3) a party to the controversy will suffer some detriment due to the decision of the trial court.”
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) is without proper care or control, subsistence, education as required by law, or other care or control necessary for his physical, mental or emotional health or morals. A determination that there is a lack of proper parental care or control may be based upon evidence of conduct by the parent, guardian or other custodian that places the health, safety or welfare of the child at risk, ....”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[A] court is empowered ... to make a finding that a child is dependent if the child meets the statutory definition by clear and convincing evidence. If the court finds that the child is dependent, then the court may make an appropriate disposition of the child to protect the child's physical, mental and moral welfare, including allowing the child to remain with the parents subject to supervision , transferring temporary legal custody to a relative or a private or public agency, or transferring custody to the juvenile court of another state.”
    8 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.