Weir v. Marley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 64 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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"In all civilized countries in which the family is regarded as the unit of social organization, its minor members must and ought to be subject to the custody and control of those who are immediately responsible for their being; for the reason that by nature there has been implanted in the human heart those seeds of parental and filial affection that will assure to the infant care and protection in the years of its helplessness, to be returned to the parents again when they in their turn may need protection in their years of helplessness, and of their child's strength and maturity. The law at the birth of an infant imposes upon the parent the duty of such care and protection, to the performance of which the instincts of nature so readily prompts, and clothes him with the right of custody that he may perform it effectually, upon the presumption that such custody, being in harmony with nature, is best for the interest, not only of the parent and child, but also of society. Conceding, however, that the primary object is the interest of the child, the presumption of the law is that its interest is to be in the custody of its parent."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State ex rel. Crockett v. Ellison · Swan v. Swan

2. ““From these cases may be deduced the doctrine-that the principle of res ad judicata does not apply in cases of habeas corpus to judgments remanding .the prisoner, or to judgments discharging the prisoner, where a new state of facts, warranting his restraint, is shown to exist different from that which existed at the time- the first judgment was rendered. That it does'apply to a judgment discharging the prisoner, where no such new state of facts is shown, may as readily be deduced from the case Ex parte Jilz, 64 Mo. 205 . The distinction thus made between judgments remaining, and those discharging the prisoner, grows out of the nature of the writ whose raison d’etre is the protection of personal liberty.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 233 Mo. App. 1234 - Ex Parte Messina v. Maltbie · In re King

3. “unless it appears by satisfactory evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. I v. B