Dickson v. Dickson’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. ““In its order, the trial court found that the husband’s current income and other current circumstances give him the financial ability to pay alimony-in-gross installments of $1,000 per month, going forward. We do not discern, however, from the trial court’s judgment a finding that the amount of the husband’s estate, as it existed at the time the judgment of divorce was entered, was sufficiently large to justify the $137,775 alimony-in-gross award, as entered by the trial court. 3 Consistent with the discussion of the evidence as set forth above, our review of the record leads us to conclude that the record does not contain substantial evidence supporting such a factual finding. To the contrary, it is clear that the alimony-in-gross award made by the trial court substantially exceeded any value that could be drawn from the evidence regarding the husband’s estate at the time of the divorce. “In [Ex parte] Hager[, 293 Ala. 47 , 299 So.2d 743 (1974) ], this Court defined alimony in gross and periodic alimony as follows: “ ‘ “Alimony in gross” is the present value of the wife’s inchoate marital rights — dower, homestead, quarantine, and distributive share. It is payable out of the husband’s present estate as it exists at the time of divorce. Borton v. Borton, [ 230 Ala. 630 , 162 So. 529 (1935).] On the other hand, “periodic alimony” is an allowance for the future support of the wife payable from the current earnings of the husband.’ “293 Ala. at 55, 299 So.2d at 750 (emphasis add”

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

2. ““In [Ex parte] Hager,[ 293 Ala. 47 , 299 So.2d 743 (1974),] this Court defined alimony in gross and periodic alimony as follows: “ ‘ “Alimony in gross” is the present value 'of the wife’s inchoate marital rights—dower, homestead, quarantine, and distributive share. It is payable out of the husband’s present estate as it exists at the time of divorce. Borton v. Borton, [ 230 Ala. 630 , 162 So. 529 (1935).] On the other hand, “periodic alimony” is an allowance for the future support of the wife payable from the current earnings-of the husband.’ “293 Ala. at 55, 299 So.2d at 750 (emphasis added). The Hager Court also stated that the award at issue ‘was intended to be, as denominated, “alimony, in gross,” a property settlement award, compensating the wife only for the loss of her 'rights in the husband’s estate.’ 293 Ala. at 55 , 299 So.2d at 751 (emphasis,added). See also Daniel v. Daniel, 841 So.2d 1246, 1250 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002) (alimony in gross is a form of property settlement .and must be payable out of -the present estate of the payor, at the time of the divorce).””

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

3. ““(1) personal property worth approximately $12,000, which was subject to a demand by the husband’s bankruptcy trustee that the husband pay $10,000 in lieu of forfeiture of his nonexempt personal property (which the husband valued at $9,150); (2) the house the husband purchased after he moved out of the marital residence, in which he had an equity of approximately $300; (3) a savings account at AmSouth Bank, with an approximate value of $10,000; (4) AmSouth Bank stock valued at approximately $4,400; and (5) a 401 (k) retirement account at AmSouth Bank ..., with a value of approximately $16,000.””

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