In Re CB’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably In re N.C. (2006), In Re RP (2008)
26 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 671 (§ 471 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on T.B. v. L.R.M. · In Re Davis · T.B. v. L.R.M. · Commonwealth v. Price · In the Interest of Lilley
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.
“In dependency proceedings our scope of review is broad. ... Although bound by the facts, we are. not bound by the trial court’s inferences, deductions, and conclusions therefrom; we must exercise our independent judgment in reviewing the court’s determination, as opposed to its findings of fact, and must order whatever right and justice dictate.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“ASFA's purpose is to eliminate the need for family reunification efforts when it is established that children were exposed to sexual or physical abuse. These parents have exhibited no responsibilities attendant with parenting but have been abusive and grossly neglectful; thus, we direct our focus away from any parental "rights" and toward the protection of these innocent, scarred children, who have been subjected to egregious horrors that shake the very foundations of the precious family institution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the thrust of Davis supports the more fundamental precept that the Juvenile Act [42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 6301-65] should be interpreted to accord the most protection to children. . . . Thus, Davis stands for the essential proposition that the Juvenile Act should be construed so as to afford the maximum opportunity to safeguard children.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. In Re FB · In re F.B.
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.