Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 289 SW2D 468 - Papenberg v. Papenberg

Papenberg v. Papenberg’s Empirical Analysis

1956

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
October 1986
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently October 1986

8 state decisions

401956196019701980decided

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

Applies 37 U.S.C. § 201

Relies on Lodahl v. Papenberg · Dreyer v. Dickman · 223 Mo. App. 138 - King v. Hayes · 148 Mo. App. 703 - Bick v. Dixon

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. ““These changed conditions would justify an increase in the allowance for her support and maintenance had plaintiff produced evidence of defendant’s ability to pay such increase. In the absence of such evidence we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to increase the ' amount of the award for the child’s support and maintenance. ⅝ ⅝ ⅜ ' ⅜ ⅜ ⅝ “The allowance of attorney’s fees and suit money is within the sound discretion of the court. However, before a court should be called upon to exercise that discretion there should be introduced some evidence of the husband’s ability to pay such an allowance.””
    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.