147 Md. App. 350 - Turner v. Turner’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 14 district · 59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 85 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably B.N. v. K.K (1988), Solomon v. Solomon (2004)
2 federal appellate · 14 district · 59 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 Baxter v. Palmigiano · COLOMIRIS v. Woods · Taylor v. NationsBank, N.A. · Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Scarlett Harbor Associates Ltd. Partnership · Cheney v. Bell National Life Insurance
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 85 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“den[ying] relief to those guilty of unlawful or inequitable conduct with respect to the matter for which relief is sought,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(b) Required considerations.—In making the determination, the court shall consider all the factors necessary for a fair and equitable award, including: (1) the ability of the party seeking alimony to be wholly or partially self-supporting; (2) the time necessary for the party seeking alimony to gain sufficient education or training to enable that party to find suitable employment; (3) the standard of living that the parties established during their marriage; (4) the duration of the marriage; (5) the contributions, monetary and nonmonetary, of each party to the well-being of the family; (6) the circumstances that contributed to the estrangement of the parties; (7) the age of each party; (8) the physical and mental condition of each party; (9) the ability of the party from whom alimony is sought to meet that party’s needs while meeting the needs of the party seeking alimony; (10) any agreement between the parties; and (11) the financial needs and financial resources of each party, including: (i) all income and assets, including property that does not produce income; (ii) any [monetary] award made ...; (iii) the nature and amount of the financial obligations of each party; and (iv) the right of each party to receive retirement benefits ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"The burden of persuasion and the initial burden of production in showing dissipation is on the party making the allegation. That party retains throughout the burden of persuading the court that funds have been dissipated, but after that party establishes a prima facie case that monies have been dissipated, i.e. expended for the principal purpose of reducing the funds available for equitable distribution, the burden shifts to the party who spent the money to produce evidence sufficient to show that the expenditures were appropriate."”
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.