Kean v. Kean’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"A. When a spouse has not been at fault and has not sufficient means for support, the court may allow that spouse, out of the property and earnings of the other spouse, permanent periodic alimony which shall not exceed one-third of his or her income. Alimony shall not be denied on the ground that one spouse obtained a valid divorce from the other spouse in a court of another state or country which had no jurisdiction over the person of the claimant spouse. In determining the entitlement and amount of alimony after divorce, the court shall consider the income, means, and assets of the spouses; the liquidity of such assets; the financial obligations of the spouses, including their earning capacity; the effect of custody of children of the marriage upon the spouse's earning capacity; the time necessary for the recipient to acquire appropriate education, training, or employment; the health and age of the parties and their obligations to support or care for dependent children; and any other circumstances that the court deems relevant. In determining whether the claimant spouse is entitled to alimony, the court shall consider his or her earning capability, in light of all other circumstances. Permanent periodic alimony shall be revoked if it becomes unnecessary and terminates if the spouse to whom it has been awarded remarries."”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Breaux v. Breaux · 778 So. 2d 70 - Hammack v. Hammack

2. “Whether appellant may, by diverting nearly half his net income for legitimate business purposes, lower his take-home pay to a point which would make an otherwise valid alimony award exceed the permitted one-third of his net income1 is a question analogous to that raised in Sonfield v. Deluca, supra, where a wife was not permitted to sink great sums into unnecessary housing and thereby create insufficient means for her support.”

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

3. ““ * * * In the area of domestic relations, much discretion must be vested in the trial judge and particularly in evaluating the weight of evidence which is to be resolved primarily on the basis of the credibility of witnesses. * * * The factual findings of the trial court are therefore to be accorded very substantial weight on review. * * * ””

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