Koppenhaver v. Koppenhaver’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently September 2011 · most notably 42 Wash. App. 214 - In Re the Marriage of Flannagan (1985), Berry v. Meadows (1986)
38 state decisions
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
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1408
Relies on Ackermann v. United States · Klapprott v. United States · McCarty v. McCarty · Bunn v. North Carolina · LeClert v. LeClert
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The wife’s motion to modify the prior decree shall be considered; however, we do not presume to tell the trial court how to rule. Intervening equities or other factors may enter into and affect whether or to what extent modification may be warranted. In ruling on a motion under Rule 60(b) the trial court has discretion, within the confines of justice, to decide and act in accordance with what is fair and equitable. (Citation omitted.) Reversal by the reviewing court will only be ordered for a clear abuse of discretion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Harkins v. Harkins
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.