Wold v. Wold’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Paulson v. Paulson (2010), Lindberg v. Lindberg (2009)
26 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 Fischer v. Fischer · Ruff v. Ruff · Kautzman v. Kautzman · Kostelecky v. Kostelecky · Sack v. Sack
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Attorney fees may be awarded in a divorce action when one spouse has a need for them and the other spouse has an ability to pay. Dvorak v. Dvorak , 2005 ND 66 , ¶ 32, 693 N.W.2d 646 . The district court and this Court have concurrent jurisdiction to award attorney fees for an appeal in a divorce proceeding. Ebach v. Ebach , 2005 ND 123 , ¶ 21, 700 N.W.2d 684 . When attorney fees are requested on appeal, we often prefer to have the district court determine the appropriateness of awarding fees and remand to the district court for a decision on the issue.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Berg v. Berg““the respective ages of the parties, their earning ability, the duration of the marriage and-conduct of the parties during the marriage, their station in life, the circumstances and necessities of each, their health and physical condition, their financial circumstances as shown by the property owned at the time, its value at the time, its income-producing capacity, if any, whether accumulated before or after the marriage, and such other matters as may be material.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Eberle v. Eberle“"A finding of fact is clearly erroneous if it is induced by an erroneous view of the law, if there is no evidence to support it, or if, although there is some evidence to support it, on the entire evidence the reviewing court is left with a definite and firm conviction a mistake has been made."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ulsaker v. White
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.