Huey v. Lente’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently September 1994 · most notably Smith v. PRICE'S CREAMERIES, DIV., ETC. (1982), Huey v. Lente (1973)
36 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
Relies on Stanley v. Illinois · Armstrong v. Manzo · McCauley v. Ray · State v. McMaster · State v. Prince
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“B. The court shall terminate parental rights with respect to a minor child when: * * * * * * (4) the child has been placed in foster care by a court order or has been otherwise placed by parents or others into the physical custody of such family and following conditions exist: (a) the child has lived in the foster home for an extended period of time; (b) the parent-child relationship has disintegrated; (c) a psychological parent-child relationship has developed between the foster family and the child; (d) if the court deems the child of sufficient capacity to express a preference, the child prefers no longer to live with the natural parent; and (e) the foster family desires to adopt the child.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“L. “neglected child” or “abused child” means a child: ****** (2) who is without proper parental care and control or subsistence, education, medical or other care or control necessary for his well-being because of the faults or habits of his parents, guardian or custodian or their neglect or refusal, when able to do so, to provide them; or (3) whose parents, guardian or custodian are unable to discharge their responsibilities to and for the child because of their incarceration, hospitalization or other physical or mental incapacity; or .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“As a threshold matter, a large part of the focus of the trial court’s findings and the greater part of the petitioners’ presentation of evidence involved matters which I would hold to be irrelevant as a matter of law. ... By the clear and unambiguous language of the statute, the sole consideration to be applied in termination proceedings is the relationship of “a parent with respect to a minor." § 22-2-23, supra. [Emphasis added.] [85 N.M. at 595, 514 P.2d at 1091.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wasson v. Wasson
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.