13 Va. App. 479 - Furr v. Furr’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently July 2014 · most notably 24 Va. App. 190 - Moreno v. Moreno (1997), 42 Va. App. 557 - Newman v. Newman (2004)
32 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 4 Va. App. 326 - Graves v. Graves · 10 Va. App. 728 - Srinivasan v. Srinivasan · Jacobs v. Jacobs · 2 Va. App. 21 - Dukelow v. Dukelow · 10 Va. App. 1 - Blank v. Blank
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Srinivasan v. Srinivasan [, 10 Va.App. 728 , 396 S.E.2d 675 (1990) ], this Court held that, in setting support awards, a court “must look to current circumstances and what the circumstances will be “within the immediate or reasonably foreseeable future,’ not to what may happen in the future.” [Id. at] 735, 396 S.E.2d [at] 679 (quoting Young v. Young, 3 Va.App. 80, 81-82 , 348 S.E.2d 46, 47 (1986)). What is “reasonably foreseeable” depends on the circumstances of the particular case. Thus, when reviewing an appeal from a denial of an increase in support, this Court looks to objective evidence available at the time of the previous award of support in order to assess what increases in expenses might reasonably have been expected. In doing so, we avoid assessing such increases in light of evidence that these increases have, in fact, occurred. “‘[S]pousal support awards must be determined in light of contemporary circumstances and ... redetermined [if necessary] in light of new circumstances.’ ” Blank v. Blank, 10 Va.App. 1, 4 , 389 S.E.2d 723, 724 (1990) (quoting Jacobs v. Jacobs, 219 Va. 993, 995 , 254 S.E.2d 56, 58 (1979)).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Code § 20-109 provides that “[u]pon the petition of either party the court may increase ... spousal support and maintenance ... as the circumstances may make proper.” The party moving for a modification of support payments must prove “both a material change in circumstances and that this change warrants a modification of support.””
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.