Baker v. Baker’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently July 2016
16 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 Beck v. Beck · Gordon v. Gordon · Wiege v. Wiege · Rueckert v. Rueckert · Fleck v. Fleck
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The case at bar is distinguishable from the facts in Baker . Here, [Denise Varriano] has had more than one residence since the parties’ divorce. She has maintained that separate residence and admittedly spent significant amounts of time with men she’s been dating.... There is evidence regarding a boyfriend immediately following the divorce having a home in which [Denise Varriano] spent a considerable amount of time and even had her children spending considerable time there. [Denise Varriano] admitted that in this relationship marriage was discussed but never materialized. There’s no evidence that [Denise Varriano] ever received mail at her boyfriend’s residence, or contributed toward any household expenses whatsoever. Further, [Denise Varri-ano’s] initial relationship after the parties’ divorce was relatively short term. In the end this initial relationship does not rise to the level of the relationship described by the trial court in Baker stating that “[the only things lacking are a change in name, a marriage license, and a wedding.]””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Varriano v. Varriano“Although we do not consider the sharing of the financial obligations surrounding the maintenance of a household to be a requisite element of cohabitation, we do find significant that Mr. Hudson did not pay any of appellant's living expenses or consistently share with her any of his assets.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Myers v. Myers
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.