Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1996 SD 90 - Olson v. Olson

Olson v. Olson’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
January 2026
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently January 2026

19 state decisions

601996200020102020decided

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 Herndon v. Herndon · Jameson v. Jameson · Tesch v. Tesch · Whalen v. Whalen · Dougherty v. Dougherty

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

  1. “changes occurring since the time of the divorce”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In assessing the obligor’s ability to pay alimony, the court may evaluate the obligor’s income in relation to his earning capacity to determine whether the obligor has attempted to avoid the alimony obligation by intentionally reducing his income. In doing so, the court may consider whether the obligor has either acted with the primary goal of reducing his gross income or has artificially reduced the net income available after expenses through exaggerating personal expenses or inflating overhead costs of a business owned, at least in part, by the obligor.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “[W]hen custody was originally settled by agreement, the court had not decided the issue of custody in light of the best interests of the child, and so such considerations would not be res judicata. The basis for allowing the court to revisit all aspects of a custody case is that the court does so on behalf of the child whose interests were not represented in the original agreement.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.