McSwain v. McSwain’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 453 So. 2d 1294 - Tucker v. Tucker · 677 So. 2d 740 - Riley v. Doerner · 847 So. 2d 815 - Mabus v. Mabus · 435 So. 2d 697 - Kavanaugh v. Carraway · 792 So. 2d 1020 - Sturgis v. Sturgis
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) that a substantial change in circumstances has transpired since issuance of the custody decree; (2) that this change adversely affects the child's welfare; and (3) that the child's best interests mandate a change of custody.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McSwain v. McSwain“[T]he chancellor should find that the overall circumstances in which a child lives have materially changed and are likely to remain materially changed for the foreseeable future.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McSwain v. McSwain“focus[ing] on the potential for future problems rather than the presently-existing circumstances of Miller's home life.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McSwain v. McSwain
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.