281 N.J. Super. 39 - Harrington v. Harrington’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
2 district · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently March 2017 · most notably Pacifico v. Pacifico (2007), 288 N.J. Super. 424 - Carfagno v. Carfagno (1995)
2 district · 38 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.
Relationships
Relies on Liotta v. National Forge Co. · Lepis v. Lepis · 190 N.J. Super. 118 - Pascarella v. Bruck · Baumann v. Marinaro · Petersen v. Petersen
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We recognize that not every factual dispute that arises in the context of matrimonial proceedings triggers the need for a plenary hearing. Adler v. Adler, 229 N.J.Super. 496, 500 [ 552 A.2d 182 ] (App. Div.1988). But we have repeatedly emphasized that trial judges cannot resolve material factual disputes upon conflicting affidavits and certifications. E.g. Fusco v. Fusco, 186 N.J.Super. 321, 329 [ 452 A.2d 681 ] (App. Div.1982); Tancredi v. Tancredi, 101 N.J.Super. 259, 262 [ 244 A.2d 139 ] (App. Div.1968). [Id. at 47, 656 A.2d 456 .]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]o establish the right to such relief, it must be shown that enforcement of the order or judgment would be unjust, oppressive or inequitable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[d]esigned to balance the interests of finality of judgments and judicial efficiency against the interest of equity and fairness.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.