451 So. 2d 579 - Gray v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably 141 Wis. 2d 569 - In RE MARRIAGE OF HARRIS v. Harris (1987), 632 So. 2d 307 - Zatzkis v. Zatzkis (1993)
29 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 Arceneaux v. Domingue · Smith v. Smith · 283 So. 2d 226 - Bernhardt v. Bernhardt · 339 So. 2d 835 - Ducote v. Ducote · Loyacano v. Loyacano
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... [Cjourts have historically insisted that a definite meaning be ascribed to both the words “open” and “concubinage,” before finding that the legal requisites of open concubinage have been proven.... [Cjoncubinage has retained the signification of a relationship in which a man and woman live together as husband and wife without being legally married.... [I]t depicts a status or relationship, rather than an act or series of acts. Concubinage is not constituted merely by acts of fornication or adultery, however frequent or even habitual.... [It] depicts a state of affairs in which the man and woman exercise with respect to each other the rights and privileges of marriage. Thus, concubinage could be defined as a relationship of sexual content in which man and woman live together as husband and wife in a state of affairs approximating marriage ... [Although living together is important to a finding of concubinage, it is not absolutely essential. [Cjourts have also ascribed a definite and distinct meaning to the term “open.” Thus, it is not enough that concubinage be proven[,] ... concubinage [must] be “open.” Concubinage is said to be open, when the illicit relationship is not disguised, concealed, or |3made secret by the parties. Concubinage is open when the parties involved avow their illicit relationship by words or conduct. A finding of “openness” clearly does not require that the parties verbally acknowledge their illicit relationship[.] However, efforts taken by the parti”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Polk v. Polk · Booth v. Samuels“It is true ... that an ex-wife’s earning capacity is to be considered in assessing her entitlement to permanent alimony, and that an ex-wife who is reasonably equipped to work should do so. LSA-C.C. Art. 160. However, in seeking a reduction or termination of permanent alimony on the grounds that a change in financial circumstances has occurred, the party seeking the termination or reduction must establish a significant change or modification in the parties’ circumstances since the time permanent alimony was last modified or set_ Although plaintiff established that Patricia Gray is presently capable of employment, he did not establish that Patricia Gray was incapable of work at the time alimony was set.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““An interrelated complex of factors is utilized in determining the adequacy of, or lack of need for a given amount of alimony. These considerations have been broadly drawn and encompass income, means, assets and earning capacity of the spouses, as well as their liabilities and obligations.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Nowlin v. Nowlin
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.