Beckle v. Beckle’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently November 2024
23 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 Porter v. Porter · Warren v. Warren · Britz v. Britz · Boschetto v. Boschetto · Biggerstaff v. Biggerstaff
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Of course, that would be true no matter what kind of business the parties owned. When a marriage ends in divorce and the business'property has to be divided, the business will not thereafter be the same. “Unfortunately, appellant has been silent as far as suggesting a more workable plan which would still assure the wife a just and equitable share of the property being distributed. Even if such a plan could now be conceived, it would be difficult for us to put it into effect without constituting our court a court of the first instance to divide the property. We have already indicated such is not the function of an appellate court. “If appellant has something better to suggest, aside from a material change in the shares of the respective parties, it should have been presented to the district court, since generally matters not presented first to to the court below cannot be raised on appeal. [Citation.]””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Klatt v. Klatt“"The crux of appellant's argument regarding punishment is that the trial court must have based its decree on an intent to punish defendant, as there is no other explanation for the severity of its effect upon appellant. Inasmuch as we do not accept the contention that the award to plaintiff, under all the circumstances present, was unjust or inequitable, it follows that we cannot say the effect on the husband was so severe as to denote an intent to punish him."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Sellers v. Sellers“burden imposed upon the property for the benefit”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Paul v. Paul
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.