128 N.C. App. 180 - Taylor v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 2010
8 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 Clark v. Clark · Plott v. Plott · Bromhal v. Stott · 35 N.C. App. 748 - Moore v. Moore · 76 N.C. App. 391 - Appelbe v. Appelbe
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]bsent a clear abuse of discretion, a judge’s determination of what is a proper amount of child support will not be disturbed on appeal. ... A judge is subject to reversal for abuse of discretion only upon a showing by the litigant that the challenged actions are manifestly unsupported by reason.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“When determining a child support award, a trial judge has a high level of discretion, not only in setting the amount of the award, but also in establishing an appropriate remedy.”
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.