12 Va. App. 1245 - Scott v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
36
cited by 36 later decisions
1
states following
August 2002
most recently cited
2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Featherstone v. Brooks · 4 Va. App. 173 - Fry v. Schwarting · 12 Va. App. 18 - Richardson v. Richardson · Morris v. Morris · Hammers v. Hammers
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] trial court need not award child support in the statutorily presumptive amount if a deviation from such an amount is justified. However, it must determine the guideline amount and then may compare this amount with the provisions of the separation agreement. If the factors ... justify an award based upon the provisions of the separation agreement ... it may then enter an award in the amount provided.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“analysis with the general principle that the jurisdiction of a divorce court to provide for child support is statutory. Code § 20-107.2.... Divorcing parents cannot by agreement divest a divorce court of its jurisdiction to award child support.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he greater amount of periodic support will [not] necessarily be in the child's best interest. For example, the agreement may provide for a lesser amount of support than presumptively payable under Code § 20-107.2, but the contract may provide for support beyond the age of the child's majority or contain provisions for education which would render the agreement more beneficial to the children. Under these circumstances, the trial [judge] may well be justified in approving, ratifying, affirming and incorporating the contract and child support provision without entering an order for the presumptive amount under Code § 20-108.2 as long as written reasons are given for the deviation.”
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.