2003 Pa. Super. 162 - Isralsky v. Isralsky’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently March 2023 · most notably 2006 Pa. Super. 175 - Smith v. Smith (2006), 2003 Pa. Super. 455 - Moran v. Moran (2003)
37 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 215 · 26 U.S.C. § 71
Relies on In Re Nomination Petition of Wesley · Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Van Youngman · LaRocca Estate · 366 Pa. Super. 19 - DeMasi v. DeMasi · 426 Pa. Super. 245 - Perlberger v. Perlberger
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“§ 3502. Equitable division of marital property (a) General rule — In an action for divorce or annulment, the court shall, upon request of either party, equitably divide, distribute or assign, in kind or otherwise, the marital property between the parties without regard to marital misconduct in such proportions and in such manner as the court deems just after considering all relevant factors....”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“An abuse of discretion is not merely an error of judgment, but rather a misapplication of the law or an unreasonable exercise of judgment. A finding that the trial court abused its discretion must rest upon a showing by clear and convincing evidence, and the trial court will be upheld on any valid ground.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]here is no simple formula by which to divide marital property. The method of distribution derives from the facts of the individual case. The list of factors [in the Code] serves as a guideline for consideration, although the list is neither exhaustive nor specific as to the weight to be given the various factors. Thus, the court has flexibility of method and concomitantly assumes responsibility in rendering its decisions.”
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.