Vardaman v. Vardaman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It does hot appear from our research that the legislature or our supreme court has definitively; explained what constitutes ‘regular [use] for the common benefit of the parties during their marriage,’ However, “ ‘ “[§ ] 30-2-51 states, that if a party does not use. his or her inheritance or gifts for the common benefit of the parties to the marriage, then the trial judge may not consider the inheritance or gifts when making a property division. Nothing in the statute states that if one party’s inheritance or gifts are used for the parties’ common benefit then the trial judge must consider the, inheritance or gifts when making the property division. In fact, the statute leaves such a determination to the discretion of the trial judge....” “ ‘[Ex parte Drummond,] 785 So.2d [358,] 362 [ (Ala.2000) ].’ “Ex parte Durbin, 818 So.2d 404, 408 (Ala.2001).””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bentley v. Bentley