Arnold v. Arnold’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on E.B. v. State · Butler, Crockett & Walsh Development Corp. v. Pinecrest Pipeline Operating Co. · Wilde v. Wilde · 2007 UT App 296 - Olsen v. Olsen · 2006 UT App 405 - Oliekan v. Oliekan
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We review the district court's [factual] findings for clear error and its conclusions of law for correctness, affording the court some discretion in applying the law to the facts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wight v. Wight“requiring the shared payment of agreed-upon private school expenses is well within the discretion of the district court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Both the decision to award attorney fees and the amount of such fees are within the trial court's sound discretion.”
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.