Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2010 UTAPP 22 - Olson v. Olson

Olson v. Olson’s Empirical Analysis

2010

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Valcarce v. Fitzgerald · Colman v. Colman · ProMax Development Corp. v. Mattson · 2008 UT App 392 - Jensen v. Jensen · A.D.T. v. State

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

  1. “We review the district court's evidentiary rulings under an abuse of discretion standard.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a clear and prejudicial abuse of discretion is demonstrated.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “`[R]egardless of the payor spouse's ability to pay more, the [recipient] spouse's demonstrated need must. . . constitute the maximum permissible alimony award.'”
    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.