427 Pa. Super. 417 - Branch v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently November 2016 · most notably 348 N.J. Super. 560 - Isaacson v. Isaacson (2002), 455 Pa. Super. 21 - Karp v. Karp (1996)
24 state decisions
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 Melzer v. Witsberger · Conway v. Dana · 189 Pa. Super. 276 - Hecht v. Hecht · 392 Pa. Super. 240 - Lesko v. Lesko · 402 Pa. Super. 536 - In Re Estate of Greenwood
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... “necessaries” and “luxuries” are relative matters .... Children of wealthy parents are entitled to the educational advantages of travel, private lessons in music, drama, swimming, horseback riding, and other activities in which they show interest and ability. They are entitled to the best medical care, good clothes, and familiarity with good restaurants, good hotels, good shows and good camps. It is possible that a child with nothing more than a house to shelter him, a coat to keep him warm and sufficient food to keep him healthy will be happier and more successful than a child who has all the “advantages,” but most parents strive and sacrifice to give their children “advantages” which cost money. A wealthy father has a legal duty to give his children the “advantages” which his financial status indicates to be reasonable ... ... [A parent] should not be forced by a support order to make personal sacrifices to give them all the advantages to which we referred above, but a father with the assets, the youth, and the ability of the defendant can furnish his children with these advantages without any recognizable sacrifice on his part.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Father’s complaint that an order commensurate with his income and lifestyle, will result in a windfall to Mother is a make-weight argument. Obviously, if the child lives with Mother, Mother may indirectly benefit from certain of the child’s need, for example, improved housing. However, that is no reason why the child should be short-changed by denying him support commensurate with his Father’s income and lifestyle.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“... Reasonable needs of child [ — for purposes of determining child support obligation — ] are not... limited to the bare necessities of life. The reasonable needs of a child whose parent or parents are wealthy may well include items which would be considered frivolous to parents who are less well off. (Énfasis suplido.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.