12 N.C. App. 390 - Austin v. Austin’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently August 2016
20 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 Stanback v. Stanback · Mercer v. Mercer · Stadiem v. Stadiem
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We think she is entitled to subsistence in keeping with defendant-husband’s means and ability and standard of living, not only from the time she instituted her action, but from the time her husband wrongfully separated himself from her.” Austin v. Austin, 12 N.C. App. 390, 393 , 183 S.E. 2d 428, 430 (1971). See e.g., Little v. Little, 9 N.C. App. 361 , 176 S.E. 2d 521 (1970) (plaintiff granted lump sum for motel bill incurred from date of separation). For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the trial court is”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Under the statutory authority vested in the trial judge he could award a lump payment or monthly payments. The amount of the allowance for subsistence is a matter for the trial judge. The exercise of his discretion in this respect is not reviewable except in case of an abuse of discretion.”
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.