Talley v. Talley’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably New Mexicans for Free Enterprise v. City of Santa Fe (2005), Mayeux v. Winder (2005)
44 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
Relies on Landavazo v. Sanchez · Hertz v. Hertz · State v. Wright · State v. Sisneros · State v. Ferguson
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““gross income” includes income from any source and includes, but is not limited to, income from salaries, wages, tips, commissions, bonuses, dividends, severance pay, pensions, interest, trust income, annuities, capital gains, social security benefits, workers’ compensation benefits, unemployment insurance benefits, disability insurance benefits, significant in-kind benefits that reduce personal living expenses, prizes and alimony or maintenance received, provided: (a)“gross income” shall not include benefits received from means-tested public assistance programs or child support received by a parent for the support of other children; (b) for income from self-employment, rent, royalties, proprietorship of a business or joint ownership of a partnership or closely held corporation, “gross income” means gross receipts minus ordinary and necessary expenses required to produce such income, but ordinary and necessary expenses does not include expenses determined by the court to be inappropriate for purposes of calculating child support; (c) “gross income” shall not include the amount of alimony payments actually paid in compliance with a court order; (d) “gross income” shall not include the amount of child support actually paid by a parent in compliance with a court order for the support of prior children; and (e) “gross income” shall not include a reasonable amount for a parent’s obligation to support prior children who are in that parent’s custody. A duty to support subsequent chi”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Leeder v. Leeder
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.