Picker v. Vollenhover’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 1986
14 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.
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"... At the time of divorce the court should not lay down rules for the future whose propriety would depend on cireum-stances materially different from those shown by the evidence and which cannot reasonable be predicted from the evidence. In particular, it should not in the original decree provide for future changes in the quantum of support based on the single criterion of the change in the amount of the earnings of the defendant, The original decree retains its vitality unless and until the court on proper showing finds that on all of the evidence presented a change in support is required. To adopt as an Oregon decree sliding-scale provisions for the future which are geared to a single one of the circumstances which are relevant to show changed conditions would be contrary to the established policy of this state ..."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hunter v. Hunter
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.