20 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2026 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
White v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2001White v. Thompson, 569 So.2d 1181, 1185 (Miss.1990). 2001White v. Thompson, 569 So.2d 1181, 1185 (Miss.1990). | 2 | 2 |
Albright v. Albrightgreen2 sentences2008The chancellor found that the move to Memphis would constitute a material adverse change, so he conducted a custody analysis as set out by our supreme court in the seminal case of Albright v. Albright, 437 So.2d 1003, 1005 (Miss.1983). 2008The chancellor found that the move to Memphis would constitute a material adverse change, so he conducted a custody analysis as set out by our supreme court in the seminal case of Albright v. Albright, 437 So.2d 1003, 1005 (Miss.1983). | 1 | 3 |
Sb v. Lwgreen2 sentences2006See C.W.L. v. R.A., 919 So.2d 267, 271 (¶ 10) (Miss.Ct.App. 2005); S.B. v. L.W., 793 So.2d 656 (Miss. 2005L.W., 793 So.2d at 657 (¶ 1). | 1 | 2 |
Jennifer Carter v. Josh Cartergreen1 sentence2026However, the mandatory nature of the GAL appointment is only triggered “where the allegations of abuse and/or neglect rise to the level of a ‘charge of abuse and/or neglect,’ . . . . [and] [i]n these situations the chancellor is required to appoint a guardian ad litem, whether the parties requested a guardian ad litem or not.” Carter v. Carter, 204 So. 3d 747, 759 (Miss. 2016) (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Rachel Smith v. David Smithgreen2 sentences2025At the same time, however, “[w]hen a chancellor chooses to hear the abuse allegation during a custody hearing, appointment of a GAL is mandatory.” Smith v. Smith, 206 So. 3d 502, 510 (¶14) (Miss. 2016).7 “In these situations the 7 In Smith, a mother accused the father of molesting the children, resulting in a DHS investigation. 2025Id. at 507 (¶2). | 1 | 1 |
McDonald v. McDonaldgreen1 sentence2016McDonald v. McDonald, 39 So.3d 868, 883 (¶ 49) (Miss. 2010) (quoting D.J.L. v. Bolivar County Dep’t of Human Servs. ex rel. | 1 | 1 |
Cwl v. Ragreen1 sentence2006See C.W.L. v. R.A., 919 So.2d 267, 271 (¶ 10) (Miss.Ct.App. 2005); S.B. v. L.W., 793 So.2d 656 (Miss. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Johnson v. Gray
green
2 sentences2006Id. at 1014-15 . 2003Id. at 1014-15 . | 2 | 2003–2006 |
Riley v. Doerner
green
2 sentences2006As the supreme court in Riley opined, a chancellor "is never obliged to ignore a child's best interest in weighing a custody change; in fact, a chancellor is bound to consider the child's best interest above all else." Riley, 677 So.2d at 745 . 2005Id. | 2 | 2005–2006 |
Vaughn v. Davis
green
1 sentence2020Id. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
In re Smith v. Smith
green
1 sentence2013Shortly thereafter, this Court issued its opinion in Smith v. Smith, 97 So.3d 43 (Miss.2012), reemphasizing that a third party’s in loco parentis status, standing alone, cannot rebut the natural-parent presumption. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Yarborough v. Alvarado
green
2 sentences2006Once the scene is set and the players’ lines and actions are reconstructed, the court must apply an objective test to resolve the ultimate inquiry: was there a formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest.” Yarborough v. Alvarado, 541 U.S. 652, 663 , 124 S.Ct. 2140 , 158 L.Ed.2d 938 (2004) (quoting Thompson v. Keohane, 516 U.S. 99, 112 , 116 S.Ct. 457 , 133 L.Ed.2d 383 (1995)). 2006Once the scene is set and the players’ lines and actions are reconstructed, the court must apply an objective test to resolve the ultimate inquiry: was there a formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest.” Yarborough v. Alvarado, 541 U.S. 652, 663 , 124 S.Ct. 2140 , 158 L.Ed.2d 938 (2004) (quoting Thompson v. Keohane, 516 U.S. 99, 112 , 116 S.Ct. 457 , 133 L.Ed.2d 383 (1995)). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Thompson v. Keohane
green
2 sentences2006Once the scene is set and the players’ lines and actions are reconstructed, the court must apply an objective test to resolve the ultimate inquiry: was there a formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest.” Yarborough v. Alvarado, 541 U.S. 652, 663 , 124 S.Ct. 2140 , 158 L.Ed.2d 938 (2004) (quoting Thompson v. Keohane, 516 U.S. 99, 112 , 116 S.Ct. 457 , 133 L.Ed.2d 383 (1995)). 2006Once the scene is set and the players’ lines and actions are reconstructed, the court must apply an objective test to resolve the ultimate inquiry: was there a formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest.” Yarborough v. Alvarado, 541 U.S. 652, 663 , 124 S.Ct. 2140 , 158 L.Ed.2d 938 (2004) (quoting Thompson v. Keohane, 516 U.S. 99, 112 , 116 S.Ct. 457 , 133 L.Ed.2d 383 (1995)). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Smith v. Watson
green
1 sentence2006Thus, Law held that the question of whether the chancellor should apply the initial custody standard or the modification *857 of custody standard is decided based on whether there was a "prior determination of custody." Id. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
White v. Thompson
green
1 sentence2005Id. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
McMillian v. State
green
1 sentence2003McMillan v. State , 361 So.2d 495 , 497 (Miss. 1978). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Heller v. Heller
green
1 sentence1995Subsequent motions for changes of custody were filed by both parties and the parties "filed written objections to the competency and jurisdiction of said special judge on the grounds that the special judge had made a final decision in the previous custody hearing and by reason thereof his jurisdiction had ceased upon the entry of his final decree." Id. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.