Burnham v. Burnham

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• \[t]o hold that a court may not consider religious factors under any circumstances would blind courts to important elements bearing on the best interests of the child\
• “[t]o hold that a court may not consider religious factors under any circumstances would blind courts to important elements bearing on the best interests of the child”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Pater v. Pater
  Ohio Supreme Court· 1992-04-15· cited 133×
• Zummo v. Zummo
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1990-05-17· cited 91×
• LeDoux v. LeDoux
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1990-02-23· cited 43×
• Leppert v. Leppert
  North Dakota Supreme Court· 1994-07-08· cited 31×
• Von Tersch v. Von Tersch
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1990-05-04· cited 30×
• Neely v. Neely
  Court of Appeals of Tennessee· 1987-06-10· cited 27×
• Moeller v. Moeller
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1983-09-30· cited 8×
• Wible v. Wible
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1981-09-18· cited 3×
• Mettenbrink v. Mettenbrink
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1985-08-02· cited 1×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Goodman v. Goodman
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1966-04-01· cited 85×
• Morris v. Morris
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1979-10-05· cited 55×
• Bonjour v. Bonjour
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1979-03-30· cited 52×
• Kaufmann v. Kaufmann
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1941-07-29· cited 19×
• Theye v. Theye
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1978-03-01· cited 13×
• Meysenburg v. Meysenburg
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1981-03-27· cited 5×