846 So. 2d 791 - State ex rel. A.C.H.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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

1. “[p]arental rights to the care, custody, and management of children is a fundamental liberty interest warranting great deference and vigilant protection under the law.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 886 So. 2d 1217 - Mouret v. Godeaux · 970 So. 2d 1022 - Sjg v. Aag

2. “is one of the most drastic actions the State can take against its citizens.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 886 So. 2d 1217 - Mouret v. Godeaux · 970 So. 2d 1022 - Sjg v. Aag

3. “Having heard the testimony of both the mother and witnesses, the Court is, however, impressed that this is in fact a significant effort to turn her life around. Whether or not she can do what is required by this Court and the federal government statutes and regulations within a reasonable period of time from this day forward, I don’t know. But certainly I think at this juncture the Court is hesitant to terminate her parental rights based on the effort that she has made. Having said that, ma’am, and having concluded that I will not terminate your parental rights this time, we will have a review hearing in six months and you’re going to have to make some effort to show that you’re going to be able to sustain for your children housing, employment, those things. You haven’t had the employment since January. The sugar and spice club or whatever it’s called is not employment that’s going to satisfy me. I hope that what’s happening for you at Naomi House is something that’s going to be strong enough to get you past this hurdle. But in six months we’ll have a review | shearing and at a juncture past six months if termination is what has to happen again, we’re not going to have a full-blown hearing again. We’ll only have that which will be required from this juncture on. I have heard enough to terminate parental rights but for what I consider to be a significant change in the last six weeks. So I guess what I’m saying is if you can prove to me in the next six months — and I’m not sayi”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 126 So. 3d 741 - State ex rel. T.M.P.