Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 819 A2D 558 - In Re CRC

In Re CRC’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently December 2024

6 state decisions

50200320102020decided

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 Ballou v. State Ethics Commission · 425 Pa. Super. 450 - Sawko v. Sawko · 365 Pa. Super. 98 - Matter of Montenegro · In Re Zachary Thomas Andrew Grimes · 344 Pa. Super. 562 - Petition of Schidlmeier by Koslof

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

  1. “The statutory scheme sets forth no criteria for the court to consider when exercising its discretion upon a petition for change of name. The only prohibition within the statute appears at § 705: “Any person violating the provisions of this chapter for purpose of avoiding payment of taxes or other debts commits a summary offense.” ... Specific guidelines [for a child’s best interests] are difficult to establish, for the circumstances in each case will be unique, as each child has individual physical, intellectual, moral, social and spiritual needs. However, general considerations should include the natural bonds between parent and child, the social stigma or re-sped afforded a particular name within the community, and, where the child is of sufficient age, whether the child intellectually and rationally understands the significance of changing his or her name.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “the party petitioning for the minor child’s change of name has the burden of coming forward with evidence that the name change requested would be in the child’s best interest, and that where a petition to change a child’s name is contested, the court must carefully evaluate all of the relevant factual circumstances to determine if the petitioning parent has established that the change is in the child’s best interest.”
    3 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.