Aubey v. Aubey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Both cases cited by husband are distinguishable from the case at bar. In Conrad , no issues were submitted to the judge; the case was strictly a jury trial. The appellant requested findings of fact and conclusions of law, arguing that the court’s judgment went beyond the jury findings. The court held that the appellant’s argument was without merit in a jury trial.... In Aubey , also a jury trial, the trial court refused to file findings of fact and conclusions of law. Even though the jury verdict may have been advisory only, the judgment was consistent with the verdict and the Au-bey court concluded it was not reversible error for the trial court to refuse to file findings of fact and conclusions of law.... In the case at bar, the judgment regarding attorney’s fees resulted from findings made by the trial court, after a bench trial, independent of the jury’s verdict. Therefore, Heafner & Associates has a right to have the trial court file findings of fact and conclusions of law in order to urge error on appeal.”

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