18 Va. App. 427 - Smith v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently January 2015 · most notably 19 Va. App. 77 - Gottlieb v. Gottlieb (1994), 36 Va. App. 401 - Joynes v. Payne (2001)
40 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 Weidman v. Babcock · Smoot v. Smoot · 5 Va. App. 238 - Brown v. Brown · 15 Va. App. 395 - Alphin v. Alphin · 7 Va. App. 22 - Booth v. Booth
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our case law uniformly holds that the challenged use of funds must be “in anticipation of divorce or separation ... [and] at a time when the marriage is in jeopardy.” Wife is correct in her assertion that the Court in Booth defined waste only “generally” and did not purport to set forth “an exclusive definition.” Nevertheless, to date, Virginia’s appellate courts have applied this rule only to funds spent contemporaneously with the marital breakdown, and we will not expand the definition to cover expenditures made for a fifteen-year period which were not specifically for the purpose of depleting the marital estate and where there was no evidence that there was an irreconcilable breakdown of the marriage. Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court did not err by finding that wife failed to show that husband’s pre-separation expenditures constituted dissipation of marital assets.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[n]o income realized from the capital gain[s] remained as a liquid asset from which support could be paid.” We also noted that the gains were”
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.