Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 10 CONNAPP 570 - Lev v. Lev

Lev v. Lev’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

2 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Hart v. Hart (1989), Battersby v. Battersby (1991)

2 district · 29 state decisions

1501987199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Association of National Advertisers, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission · Koizim v. Koizim · Miller v. Miller · Hardisty v. Hardisty · Cookson v. Cookson

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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The allowance and amount of counsel fees is left to the exercise of judicial discretion, and the availability of funds with which to pay the attorney's fees of the spouse claiming the allowance is not an absolute standard for denying the award. Anderson v. Anderson, 191 Conn. 46 , 59 , 463 A.2d 578 (1983); Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald, 190 Conn. 26 , 30 , 459 A.2d 498 (1983).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “the mere fact that the defendant entered a pro se appearance and filed a pro se brief does not mean that she may not have actually incurred attorney's fees by way of legal advice, consultation, research or assistance in the preparation and typing of her brief.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.