Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 17 N.C. App. 175 - Sprinkle v. Sprinkle

17 N.C. App. 175 - Sprinkle v. Sprinkle’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
2
states following
March 1999
most recently cited

30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently March 1999 · most notably Williams v. Williams (1980), 132 N.C. App. 401 - Wells v. Wells (1999)

30 state decisions

200197219801990decided

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 10 N.C. App. 402 - Peoples v. Peoples · Harrell v. Harrell · 7 N.C. App. 456 - Peeler v. Peeler · Fogartie v. Fogartie · Deal v. Deal

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.

  1. “[i]n determining the needs of a dependent spouse, all of the circumstances of the parties should be taken into consideration including the property, earnings, earning capacity, condition and accustomed standard of living of the parties.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In North Carolina, it has been held that “[a] finding that the wife . .. cannot be represented in the divorce action by counsel without financial help from her husband is equivalent to a finding that she does not have sufficient means whereon to subsist during the defense of the suit and to defray the expenses thereof (G.S. 50-16.3(a)(2)) [grounds for alimony pen-dente lite]; and that finding is equivalent to a finding that the wife is substantially in need of support from the husband (G.S. 50-16.1(3)) [definition of dependent spouse].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““(1) It shall appear from all the evidence presented pursuant to G.S. 50-16.8 (f), that such spouse is entitled to the relief demanded by such spouse in the action in which the application for alimony pendente lite is made, and (2) It shall appear that the dependent spouse has not sufficient means whereon to subsist during the prosecution or defense of the suit and to defray the necessary expenses thereof.””
    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.