Eberle v. Eberle’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 state decisions

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

1. “A district court’s valuation and distribution of marital property are findings of fact, subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review. “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, after reviewing the entirety of the evidence, this Court is left with a definite and firm conviction a mistake has been made.” Lynnes v. Lynnes, 2008 ND 71, ¶ 12 , 747 N.W.2d 93 . A district court’s findings of fact are presumed correct, and we view the evidence in the light most favorable to its findings. Under the clearly erroneous standard of review, we do not reweigh the evidence or reassess the credibility of the witnesses when there is evidence to support a district court’s findings, and we will not reverse a district court’s decision merely because we might have reached a different result. A choice between two permissible views of the weight of the evidence is not clearly erroneous.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lund v. Lund

2. “A district court’s marital property valuations are not clearly erroneous if they are within the range of evidence presented. An owner of real property may testify as to the value of the land with out any further qualification or special knowledge. The district court is in a better position than this Court to judge the credibility and observe the demean- or of witnesses and to determine property values.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Kosobud v. Kosobud