Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 295 SC 486 - Ariail v. Ariail

Ariail v. Ariail’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently April 2016

17 state decisions

1201988199020002010decided

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 Gillespie v. Gillespie · Mitchell v. Mitchell · Machado v. Machado · Brewer v. Brewer · O'Neill v. O'Neill

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

  1. “however, this court is not bound by the parties' stipulated characterization of the action, especially where the record clearly reflects the action was for a different purpose. See Forbes v. Kingan & Co. , 174 S.C. 24 , 176 S.E. 880 (1934) (a stipulation of fact made in a transcript of record that is not sustained by the record is not conclusive). By her amended petition, Mrs. Ariail sought”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[i]n the usage prevalent in South Carolina the term `legal separation' is not a synonym for divorce a mensa et thoro, but rather `the term is a generic one, without any specific definition, which is rather loosely applied to various situations where the husband and wife are living apart, at least temporarily, under some sanction of contract or law.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Brewington involved an action for a legal separation, separate support and maintenance, an equitable distribution of marital property, unpaid support, and attorney fees. In that case, we distinguished an action for legal separation from an action for an absolute divorce and we held the family court had subject matter jurisdiction”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.