Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2003 SD 46 - Savage v. Savage

Savage v. Savage’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 2020

6 state decisions

20200320102020decided

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 Malcolm v. Malcolm · 162 Wis. 2d 96 - In RE MARRIAGE OF NICHOLS v. Nichols · Connolly v. Connolly · Steffens v. Peterson · Paradeis v. Paradeis

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

  1. “This Court has been very clear about a trial court’s ability to modify an alimony award. In Paradeis v. Paradeis, we reiterated the rule that “[o]nce a court approves an alimony award, it can modify it. This authority of a trial court is not affected by the fact [that] the original divorce judgment was based on an agreement between the parties[.]” 461 N.W.2d 135, 137 (S.D.1990) (citing Connolly v. Connolly, 270 N.W.2d 44 n2 (SD 1978)). In Harding-Moyer v. Harding, we again acknowledged that a stipulation in the nature of spousal support or maintenance was not contractual in nature, but rather that it was subject to modification or termination on a showing of changed circumstances. 2000 SD 126, ¶ 13 , 616 N.W.2d 899, 902 (citing Saxvik v. Saxvik, 1996 SD 18, ¶ 9 , 544 N.W.2d 177, 179 ).”
    1 later decision 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.