Wallop v. Wallop’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably Meima v. Broemmel (2005), Wallop Canyon Ranch, LLC v. Goodwyn (2015)
28 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 Berish v. Berish · Sutliff v. Sutliff · In Re Marriage of Kramer · 138 Ill. App. 3d 252 - In Re Marriage of Brooks · 4 Va. App. 113 - Mitchell v. Mitchell
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In granting a divorce, the court shall make such disposition of the property of the parties as appears just and equitable, having regard for the respective merits of the parties and the condition in which they will be left by the divorce, the party through whom the property was acquired and the burdens imposed upon the property for the benefit of either party and children.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Stoker v. Stoker · Boyle v. Boyle“However, the element having to do with the party through which the property was acquired is only one of several elements set forth in the statute for consideration by the trial court. The other elements there set forth are to receive like consideration, e.g., condition in which the parties will be left by the divorce and merits of the parties. In the final analysis, the district court disposed of the interests of husband and wife in accordance with the antenuptial agreement (treating each party as owning one-half interest in the property). Husband retained his separate properties, and wife retained hers. [[Image here]] The district court did not here abuse its discretion.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“issues of credibility and the weight to be given to testimony are matters to be resolved by the trier of fact, not an appellate court. Thus, we may not substitute our judgment for that of a trial court with respect to issues concerning credibility.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Yoeuth v. State · Houx v. Houx
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.