181 W. Va. 92 - Segal v. Beard’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently November 2008 · most notably 190 W. Va. 341 - MARY D. v. Watt (1992), 198 W. Va. 171 - Carter v. Carter (1996)
44 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 Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Goss v. Lopez · 172 W. Va. 158 - LaRue v. LaRue · 179 W. Va. 48 - Sally-Mike Properties v. Yokum · 177 W. Va. 742 - Goff v. Goff
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"At any time after the entry of an order pursuant to the provisions of this section, the court may, upon the verified petition of either of the parties, revise or alter such order concerning the maintenance of the parties, or either of them, and make a new order concerning the same, as the altered circumstances or needs of the parties may render necessary to meet the ends of justice; and the court may also from time to time afterward, on the verified petition of either of the parties or other proper person having actual or legal custody of the minor child or children of the parties, revise or alter such order concerning the custody and maintenance of the children, and made a new order concerning the same, as the circumstances of the parents or other proper person or persons and the benefit of the children may require. In granting such relief, the court may, where other means are not conveniently available, alter any prior order of the court with respect to the distribution of marital property, if such property is still held by the parties, and if necessary to give effect to a modification of alimony, child support or child custody or necessary to avoid an inequitable or unjust result which would be caused by the manner in which the modification will affect the prior distribution of marital property." (Emphasis added).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“1. A family law master lacks jurisdiction to hear a petition for modification of an order when the modification proceeding does not involve child custody, child visitation, child support or spousal support. W.Va.Code, 48A-4-l(i)(4) [1986], 2. A circuit court lacks jurisdiction under W.Va.Code, 48-2-15(e) [1986] to modify a divorce decree when the modification proceeding does not involve alimony, child support or child custody.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The ten-day period for filing a petition for review of a family law master’s recommended [order], W.Va.Code, 48A-4-7(a) [1986], is tolled until an aggrieved party is served with notice of the filing of the recommended [order]. The family law master must serve notice of the filing of the recommended [order].””
2 later decisions 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.