28 So. 3d 537 - Schmitt v. Schmitt’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1 ¡Although the code articles do not define fault, the comments to Article 111 indicate that “[f]ault continues to mean misconduct that rises to the level of one of the previously existing fault grounds for legal separation or divorce.” La. C.C. art. Ill, 1997 Revision Comment (c)(citing Allen v. Allen, 94-1090 (La.12/12/94), 648 So.2d 359 ). Fault thus includes habitual intemperance or excesses, cruel treatment or outrages, and abandonment. Walker v. Walker, 41,573, pp. 2-3 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/06), 942 So.2d 605, 608 . A spouse who petitions for final periodic support need not be totally blameless in the marital discord. Only misconduct of a serious na ture, providing an independent contributory or proximate cause of the breakup, equates to legal fault. Gremillion v. Gremillion, 39,588, p. 11 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/6/05), 900 So.2d 262, 269-70 . [[Image here]] Although in determining entitlement to final periodic support the fault of the spouse from whom support is sought generally is not pertinent. However, an exception is recognized when the ground for establishing fault on the part of the claimant spouse is abandonment. Terry v. Terry, 06-1406, p. 8 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/28/07), 954 So.2d 790 , 796 n. 1 (citing Gitschlag v. Gitschlag, 593 So.2d 1331, 1335, n. 1 (La.App. 1st Cir.1991)). Cruel treatment by the other spouse may be sufficient to constitute lawful cause to leave. To prove cruel treatment a party needs to show a continued pattern of mental harassment, nagging, and grip”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 122 So. 3d 1089 - Gisleson v. Deputy

2. “121 A. When a spouse has not been at fault and is in need of support, based on the needs of that party and the ability of the other .to pay, that spouse may be awarded final periodic support in accordance, with Paragraph B of this Article. B. The court shall consider all relevant factors in determining the amount and duration of final support. Those factors may include: 1) The income and means of the parties, including the liquidity of such means. 2) The financial obligations of the parties. 3) The earning capacity of the parties. 4) The effect of custody of children upon a party’s earning capacity. 5) The time necessary for the claimant to acquire appropriate education, training, or employment. 6) The health and age of the parties. 7) The duration of the marriage. 8) The tax consequences to either of the parties. C. The sum awarded under this Article shall not exceed one-third of the obli-gor’s net income.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 199 So. 3d 1180 - Shaw v. Young

3. “A trial court's factual findings regarding fault in the area of domestic relations are to be given great deference, and findings of fact on the issue of a spouse's fault for the purposes of determining final periodic support will not be disturbed on appeal unless found to be manifestly erroneous.”

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