three part test in Mississippi

20 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1987–2022 1 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.

Followed or applied (18)

Case	Followed	Cited
Bredemeier v. Jacksongreen miss · 1997 · cited in 6 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1999–2001 2 sentences 2001Therefore, the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: "a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change's adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child." Brawley v. Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 (¶ 12) (Miss.Ct.App. 1999) (citing Bredemeier v. Jackson, 689 So.2d 770, 775 (Miss.1997)); Pace v. Owens, 511 So.2d 489 (Miss.1987); Duran v. Weaver, 495 So.2d 1355 (Miss.1986); Smith v. Todd, 464 So.2d 1155 (Miss.1985). 2001In Stark v. Anderson, 748 So.2d 838, 842 (Miss.Ct.App.1999), the Mississippi Court of Appeals made the following summary of the modification of custody standard: In proceedings to modify child custody arrangements, this Court has stated that the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: “a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change’s adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child.” Brawley v. Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 (¶ 12) (Miss.Ct.A	4	6
Bubac v. Bostongreen miss · 1992 · cited in 5 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1999–2001 2 sentences 2001Therefore, the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: "a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change's adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child." Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 ; Bredemeier, 689 So.2d 770 ; Bubac, 600 So.2d 951 ; Phillips, 555 So.2d at 700-1 ; Pace, 511 So.2d 489 ; Smith, 464 So.2d 1155 . 2001In Stark v. Anderson, 748 So.2d 838, 842 (Miss.Ct.App.1999), the Mississippi Court of Appeals made the following summary of the modification of custody standard: In proceedings to modify child custody arrangements, this Court has stated that the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: “a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change’s adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child.” Brawley v. Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 (¶ 12) (Miss.Ct.A	3	5
Ash v. Ashgreen miss · 1993 · cited in 3 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1999–2001 2 sentences 2001This Court has also noted that "the `totality of the circumstances' must be considered." Wright v. Stanley, 700 So.2d 274, 280 (Miss.1997) (citing Ash v. Ash, 622 So.2d 1264, 1266 (Miss.1993)). 2001This Court has also noted that "the `totality of the circumstances' must be considered." Wright v. Stanley, 700 So.2d 274, 280 (Miss.1997) (citing Ash v. Ash, 622 So.2d 1264, 1266 (Miss.1993)).	3	3
Wright v. Stanleygreen miss · 1997 · cited in 3 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1999–2001 2 sentences 2001This Court has also noted that "the `totality of the circumstances' must be considered." Wright v. Stanley, 700 So.2d 274, 280 (Miss.1997) (citing Ash v. Ash, 622 So.2d 1264, 1266 (Miss.1993)). 2001This Court has also noted that "the `totality of the circumstances' must be considered." Wright v. Stanley, 700 So.2d 274, 280 (Miss.1997) (citing Ash v. Ash, 622 So.2d 1264, 1266 (Miss.1993)).	3	3
James White v. Carl Thomasgreen ca5 · 1981 · cited in 2 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1996–1998 2 sentences 1998In Ishee v. Moss , the federal district court formulated the following three part analysis for determining whether there has been deprivation of a liberty interest: A constitutionally protected liberty interest is implicated only if an employee is discharged in a manner that creates a false and defamatory impression which stigmatizes and forecloses him from other employment opportunities. [ White v. Thomas, 660 F.2d 680, 684 (5th Cir.1981)]; Codd v. Velger, 429 U.S. 624, 628 [, 97 S.Ct. 882, 884 , 51 L.Ed.2d 92 ]... (1977). 1996In Ishee v. Moss, the federal district court formulated the following three part analysis for determining whether there has been deprivation of a liberty interest: A constitutionally protected liberty interest is implicated only if an employee is discharged in a manner that creates a false and defamatory impression which stigmatizes and forecloses him from other employment opportunities. [White v. Thomas, 660 F.2d 680, 684 (5th Cir. 1981)]; Codd v. Velger, 429 U.S. 624 , 628 . . . (1977).	2	2
Brawley v. Brawleygreen missctapp · 1999 · cited in 6 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1999–2007 2 sentences 2007See also Sanford v. Arinder, 800 So.2d 1267, 1272 (Miss.Ct.App.2001) (quoting Brawley v. Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 (Miss.Ct.App.1999)) ("the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: `a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change's adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child.'") (emphasis added). 2001In Stark v. Anderson, 748 So.2d 838, 842 (Miss.Ct.App.1999), the Mississippi Court of Appeals made the following summary of the modification of custody standard: In proceedings to modify child custody arrangements, this Court has stated that the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: “a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change’s adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child.” Brawley v. Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 (¶ 12) (Miss.Ct.A	1	6
Pavone v. Mississippi Riverboat Amusement Corp.green ca5 · 1995 · cited in 2 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1998–1999 2 sentences 1999Faced with the question of whether dockside casinos were entitled to the status of Jones Act vessels, the Fifth Circuit constructed a three part test in Pavone v. Mississippi Riverboat Amusement Corporation, 52 F.3d 560, 570 (5th Cir.1995). 1998Faced with the question of whether dockside casinos were entitled to the status of Jones Act vessels, the Fifth Circuit constructed a three part test in Pavone v. Mississippi Riverboat Amusement Corporation, 52 F.3d 560, 570 . (5th Cir. 1995).	1	2
Codd v. Velgergreen scotus · 1977 · cited in 2 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1996–1998 2 sentences 1998In Ishee v. Moss , the federal district court formulated the following three part analysis for determining whether there has been deprivation of a liberty interest: A constitutionally protected liberty interest is implicated only if an employee is discharged in a manner that creates a false and defamatory impression which stigmatizes and forecloses him from other employment opportunities. [ White v. Thomas, 660 F.2d 680, 684 (5th Cir.1981)]; Codd v. Velger, 429 U.S. 624, 628 [, 97 S.Ct. 882, 884 , 51 L.Ed.2d 92 ]... (1977). 1998In Ishee v. Moss , the federal district court formulated the following three part analysis for determining whether there has been deprivation of a liberty interest: A constitutionally protected liberty interest is implicated only if an employee is discharged in a manner that creates a false and defamatory impression which stigmatizes and forecloses him from other employment opportunities. [ White v. Thomas, 660 F.2d 680, 684 (5th Cir.1981)]; Codd v. Velger, 429 U.S. 624, 628 [, 97 S.Ct. 882, 884 , 51 L.Ed.2d 92 ]... (1977).	1	2
Huggins v. Stategreen missctapp · 2006 · cited in 1 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011 1 sentence 2011The Mississippi Appellate Courts have applied the following three part test, in determining “whether an in forma pauperis case should proceed or be dismissed as frivolous: 1) does the complaint have a realistic chance of success; 2) does it present an arguably sound basis in fact and law; and 3) can [the complainant] prove any set of facts that would warrant relief.” Huggins v. State, 928 So.2d 981, 983 [ (¶ 4) ] (Miss.Ct.App.2006) (citing Evans v. State, 725 So.2d 613, 679 [ (¶ 275) ] (Miss.1997)).	1	1
Evans v. Stategreen miss · 1997 · cited in 1 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011 1 sentence 2011The Mississippi Appellate Courts have applied the following three part test, in determining “whether an in forma pauperis case should proceed or be dismissed as frivolous: 1) does the complaint have a realistic chance of success; 2) does it present an arguably sound basis in fact and law; and 3) can [the complainant] prove any set of facts that would warrant relief.” Huggins v. State, 928 So.2d 981, 983 [ (¶ 4) ] (Miss.Ct.App.2006) (citing Evans v. State, 725 So.2d 613, 679 [ (¶ 275) ] (Miss.1997)).	1	1
Sanford v. Arindergreen missctapp · 2001 · cited in 1 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007 1 sentence 2007See also Sanford v. Arinder, 800 So.2d 1267, 1272 (Miss.Ct.App.2001) (quoting Brawley v. Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 (Miss.Ct.App.1999)) ("the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: `a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change's adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child.'") (emphasis added).	1	1
Peters v. Petersgreen missctapp · 1999 · cited in 1 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 1 sentence 2005In the case of Peters v. Peters, 744 So.2d 803, 806-07 (¶ 10) (Miss.	1	1
Stowers v. Humphreygreen miss · 1991 · cited in 1 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 1 sentence 2005Stowers v. Humphrey, 576 So.2d 138, 140-41 (Miss. 1991).	1	1
Stark v. Andersongreen missctapp · 1999 · cited in 1 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001 1 sentence 2001In Stark v. Anderson, 748 So.2d 838, 842 (Miss.Ct.App.1999), the Mississippi Court of Appeals made the following summary of the modification of custody standard: In proceedings to modify child custody arrangements, this Court has stated that the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: “a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change’s adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child.” Brawley v. Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 (¶ 12) (Miss.Ct.A	1	1
McFarland v. Stategreen miss · 1998 · cited in 1 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998 1 sentence 1998Stewart v. State, 662 So.2d 552, 557 (Miss.1995); McFarland, 707 So.2d at 171 (¶ 14). ¶ 11.	1	1
Stewart v. Stategreen miss · 1995 · cited in 1 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998 1 sentence 1998Stewart v. State, 662 So.2d 552, 557 (Miss.1995); McFarland, 707 So.2d at 171 (¶ 14). ¶ 11.	1	1
United States v. Rowland Chester Thomasgreen ca5 · 1978 · cited in 1 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1994–1994 1 sentence 1994United States v. Thomas, 571 F.2d 285, 288 (5th Cir. 1978).	1	1
Estate of Lawler v. Westongreen miss · 1984 · cited in 1 Mississippi opinions naming this issue, 1987–1987 1 sentence 1987See Estate of Lawler v. Weston, 451 So.2d 739, 743 (Miss. 1984).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

Case	Cited	Years
Pace v. Owens green miss · 1987 2 sentences 2001Therefore, the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: "a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change's adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child." Brawley v. Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 (¶ 12) (Miss.Ct.App. 1999) (citing Bredemeier v. Jackson, 689 So.2d 770, 775 (Miss.1997)); Pace v. Owens, 511 So.2d 489 (Miss.1987); Duran v. Weaver, 495 So.2d 1355 (Miss.1986); Smith v. Todd, 464 So.2d 1155 (Miss.1985). 2001Therefore, the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: "a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change's adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child." Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 ; Bredemeier, 689 So.2d 770 ; Bubac, 600 So.2d 951 ; Phillips, 555 So.2d at 700-1 ; Pace, 511 So.2d 489 ; Smith, 464 So.2d 1155 .	4	2001–2001
Smith v. Todd green miss · 1985 2 sentences 2001Therefore, the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: "a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change's adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child." Brawley v. Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 (¶ 12) (Miss.Ct.App. 1999) (citing Bredemeier v. Jackson, 689 So.2d 770, 775 (Miss.1997)); Pace v. Owens, 511 So.2d 489 (Miss.1987); Duran v. Weaver, 495 So.2d 1355 (Miss.1986); Smith v. Todd, 464 So.2d 1155 (Miss.1985). 2001Therefore, the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: "a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change's adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child." Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 ; Bredemeier, 689 So.2d 770 ; Bubac, 600 So.2d 951 ; Phillips, 555 So.2d at 700-1 ; Pace, 511 So.2d 489 ; Smith, 464 So.2d 1155 .	4	2001–2001
Duran v. Weaver green miss · 1986 2 sentences 2001Therefore, the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: "a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change's adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child." Brawley v. Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 (¶ 12) (Miss.Ct.App. 1999) (citing Bredemeier v. Jackson, 689 So.2d 770, 775 (Miss.1997)); Pace v. Owens, 511 So.2d 489 (Miss.1987); Duran v. Weaver, 495 So.2d 1355 (Miss.1986); Smith v. Todd, 464 So.2d 1155 (Miss.1985). 2001Pace v. Owens, 511 So.2d 489 (Miss.1987); Duran v. Weaver, 495 So.2d 1355 (Miss.1986); Smith v. Todd, 464 So.2d 1155 (Miss.1985).	2	2001–2001
Phillips v. Phillips green miss · 1989 2 sentences 2001Therefore, the non-custodial parent must satisfy a three part test: "a substantial change in circumstances of the custodial parent since the original custody decree, the substantial change's adverse impact on the welfare of the child, and the necessity of the custody modification for the best interest of the child." Brawley, 734 So.2d 237 ; Bredemeier, 689 So.2d 770 ; Bubac, 600 So.2d 951 ; Phillips, 555 So.2d at 700-1 ; Pace, 511 So.2d 489 ; Smith, 464 So.2d 1155 . 2001Brawley, 734 So.2d at 241 ; Bredemeier, 689 So.2d at 775 ; Bubac, 600 So.2d at 955 ; Phillips, 555 So.2d at 700-1 ; Pace, 511 So.2d at 490 ; Smith, 464 So.2d at 1157-58 .	2	2001–2001
Mullins v. Ratcliff green miss · 1987 2 sentences 1992When deciding whether the beneficiary under a will has overcome a presumption of undue influence, we employ the three part test set out in Mullins v. Ratcliff, 515 So.2d 1183 (Miss. 1987). 1992When deciding whether the beneficiary under a will has overcome a presumption of undue influence, we employ the three part test set out in Mullins v. Ratcliff, 515 So.2d 1183 (Miss.1987).	2	1992–1992
Solem v. Helm red scotus · 1983 2 sentences 2022The proportionality principle under the Eighth Amendment is evaluated under a three- part test from Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277, 292 , 103 S. Ct. 3001, 3010 , 77 L. 2022The proportionality principle under the Eighth Amendment is evaluated under a three- part test from Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277, 292 , 103 S. Ct. 3001, 3010 , 77 L.	1	2022–2022
Mabus v. Mabus green miss · 2003 2 sentences 2005The movant, by a preponderance of the evidence, must satisfy a three part test: "(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." Id. 2005The movant, by a preponderance of the evidence, must satisfy a three part test: "(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." Id.	1	2005–2005

Where else courts name it

CT 114 (1981–2025) TX 80 (1974–2024) PA 64 (1975–2025) OH 47 (1991–2026) WA 33 (2003–2024) ID 30 (1996–2020) MT 26 (1973–2020) MD 22 (1990–2022) IN 20 (1983–2017) MS 20 (1987–2022) LA 19 (1976–2015) NJ 19 (1978–2020) MO 16 (1979–2025) FL 15 (1982–2023) MI 14 (1990–2025) CA 13 (1975–2023) AZ 12 (1982–2023) VA 9 (1986–2025) TN 9 (1994–2024) NC 8 (1992–2024) DE 8 (1984–2025) CO 8 (1983–2025) OK 8 (1985–2013) IL 7 (1998–2021) SD 6 (1992–2006) HI 5 (2008–2013) DC 5 (1980–2024) MN 5 (1985–2015) OR 4 (1983–2022) NM 4 (2000–2025) WI 4 (1980–2023) IA 4 (1976–2020) KY 4 (1993–2025) NY 4 (1999–2008) SC 4 (1997–2024) GA 4 (1995–2025) WY 4 (2005–2016) ME 3 (1995–2012) NE 3 (2013–2022) RI 2 (1995–2005) UT 2 (2010–2025) WV 2 (1989–2003) MA 2 (1999–2020)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check