449 Pa. Super. 113 - Kessler v. Helmick’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. “1) The trial court abused its discretion in determining SSI benefits were income to her household. 2) The trial court abused its discretion in deviating the child support in an amount lower than if the SSI benefits had been included as household income. 3) The trial court abused its discretion in not considering the unusual expenses of the handicapped child and the fact that the SSI was for the child and not to reduce appellee’s obligation for child support. In child support cases our standard of review is as follows: [T]he amount of a support order is largely within the discretion of the trial court, whose judgment should not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion. An abuse of discretion is not merely an error of judgment, but rather a misapplication of the law or an unreasonable exercise of judgment. A finding that the trial court abused its discretion must rest upon a showing by clear and convincing evidence, and the trial court will be upheld on any valid ground.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2003 Pa. Super. 162 - Isralsky v. Isralsky · Dauphin County Social Services, for Children & Youth v. R.J.L.