2000 Pa. Super. 392 - Gephart v. Gephart’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 state decisions

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

1. “Our standard of review ... is very narrow. We can reverse a support order only if we find that the order cannot be sustained on any valid ground. The decision of the trial court will not be reverse absent an abuse of discretion or an error of law. A finding that there has been an abuse of discretion ‘requires proof of more than a mere error in judgment, but rather evidence that the law was misapplied or overridden, or that the judgment was manifestly unreasonable or based on bias, ill will, prejudice or partiality.’ Nevertheless, where the record demonstrates that the lower court has failed to consider all factors relevant to an award of support, the Superior Court should remand for a full evidentiary hearing.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2001 Pa. Super. 266 - Riley v. Foley

2. “not as an amount which the person could theoretically earn, but as that amount which the person could realistically earn under the circumstances, considering his or her age, health, mental and physical condition and training.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. MacKay v. MacKay

3. “place primary emphasis on the net incomes and earning capacities of the parties[.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. MacKay v. MacKay