166 Ind. App. 620 - Flora v. Flora’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
2 district · 57 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently April 2015 · most notably Lynk v. LaPorte Superior Court No. 2 (1986), Anderson v. Anderson (1979)
2 district · 57 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 167 Ind. App. 96 - Board of Com'rs of Delaware County v. Briggs · Woodruff v. Woodruff · 128 Ind. App. 408 - Sims v. Sims · 271 So. 2d 181 - Riley v. Riley · 140 Ind. App. 246 - Bahre v. Bahre
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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The key issue for the court’s determination is whether there exists a reasonable possibility of reconciliation and the marriage as a whole must be considered. From the evidence presented at the hearing, the court must be satisfied that the parties can no longer live together because of difficulties so substantial that no reasonable efforts could reconcile them. ... [I]t is the marriage relationship as a whole which is at issue, not the specific acts or conduct of the parties. All of the surrounding facts must be in quired into if the marriage should be dissolved. . . . [T]he crucial issue is whether a reasonable possibility of reconciliation exists. The subjective state of mind of the parties toward their relationship as well as any observable acts or occurrences would be relevant upon this issue. (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hendry v. Hendry“Despite the defendant's claims to the contrary, the evidence amply supports the trial court's factual finding of irretrievable breakdown. We decline. . . to circumscribe this delicate process of fact-finding by imposing the constraint of guidelines on an inquiry that is necessarily individualized and particularized. `Since it is the marriage as a whole which is at issue, any evidence which bears upon the viability of the marriage is admissible, whether it be classified as objective or subjective.'”
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.