Sigg v. Sigg’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently August 2024
13 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 27 Cal. 3d 645 - Moffat v. Moffat · Hogge v. Hogge · 61 Cal. App. 3d 289 - In Re Marriage of Ciganovich · 622 So. 2d 1264 - Ash v. Ash · Alta Industries, Ltd. v. Hurst
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A trial court’s factual findings underlying a holding of material change of circumstances in a [custody] decree and a determination of the children’s best interests may not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous. A court’s legal conclusion as to whether a material change in circumstances has occurred that would warrant reconsidering the [original] decree is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. A trial judge’s award of custody ... is also reviewed for abuse of discretion.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“lived as though they were husband and wife.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The process of marshaling is ... fundamentally different from that of presenting the evidence at trial. The challenging party must temporarily remove its own prejudices and fully embrace the adversary's position; [the challenging party] must play the devil's advocate. In so doing, appellants must present the evidence in a light most favorable to the trial court and not attempt to construe the evidence in a light favorable to their case. Appellants cannot merely present carefully selected facts and excerpts from the record in support of, their position. Nor can they simply restate or review evidence that points to an alternate finding or a finding contrary to the trial court's finding of fact.”
1 later decision 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.