Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 418 Pa. Super. 39 - McAuliffe v. McAuliffe

418 Pa. Super. 39 - McAuliffe v. McAuliffe’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
4
states following
January 2014
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently January 2014 · most notably 429 Pa. Super. 540 - Crawford v. Crawford (1993), 72 Wash. App. 800 - Matter of Marriage of Stenshoel (1993)

36 state decisions

250199220002010decided

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 359 Pa. Super. 12 - Ritter v. Ritter · 286 Pa. Super. 562 - Commonwealth Ex Rel. Hagerty v. Eyster · 311 Pa. Super. 507 - Commonwealth v. Vogelsong · 327 Pa. Super. 326 - Prozzoly v. Prozzoly · 318 Pa. Super. 516 - Shovlin v. Shovlin

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

  1. “income must reflect actual available financial resources and not the often times fictional financial picture which develops as the result of depreciation deductions taken against ... income as permitted by the federal income tax laws. Otherwise put, “cash flow” ought to be considered and not federally taxed income.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Initially we note that our review from an order awarding support is very narrow. We can reverse a support order only if ■we find that the order cannot be sustained on any valid ground. The decision of the trial court will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion or an error of law.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “`new reserves' contemplated [in Cunningham ] should not be read to mean an allocation for future expenditures or the expansion of a party's business. To the contrary, the cash outlays for `new reserves' must be necessary for the continued operation and smooth running of the business.”
    3 later decisions 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.