Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 491 So. 2d 5 - Lagars v. Lagars

491 So. 2d 5 - Lagars v. Lagars’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 2016

12 state decisions

601986199020002010decided

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 348 So. 2d 75 - Pearce v. Pearce · Vicknair v. Vicknair · 389 So. 2d 381 - Adams v. Adams · 302 So. 2d 903 - Frederic v. Frederic · 316 So. 2d 111 - Webster v. Rushing

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

  1. “The award of alimony after divorce is governed by La. C.C. art. 112 which provides in pertinent part: A. (1) When a spouse has not been at fault and has no sufficient means for support, the court may allow that spouse, out of the property and earnings of the other spouse, permanent periodic alimony which shall not exceed one-third of his or her income. Alimony shall not be denied on the ground that one spouse obtained a valid divorce from the other spouse in a court of another state or country which had no jurisdiction over the person of the claimant spouse. (2) In determining the entitlement and amount of alimony after divorce, the court shall consider: (a) The income, means, and assets of the spouses; (b) The liquidity of such assets; (c) The financial obligations of the spouses, including their earning capacity; (d) The effect of custody of children of the marriage upon the spouse's earning capacity; (e) The time necessary for the recipient to acquire appropriate education, training, or employment; (f) The health and age of the parties and their obligations to support or care for dependent children; and (g) Any other circumstances that the court deems relevant. (3) In determining whether the claimant spouse is entitled to alimony, the court shall consider his or her earning capability, in light of all other circumstances. (4) Permanent periodic alimony shall be revoked if it becomes unnecessary and terminates if the spouse to whom it has been awarded remarries or enters in”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"In Fulmer v. Fulmer, 301 So.2d 622 (La.1974), the wife obtained a judicial separation based on the husband's fault (abandonment), and the husband obtained a divorce on a no-fault basis, by reason of the expiration of the statutory period following judicial separation, without reconciliation, under La.R.S. 9:302. This court held that where a judicial separation is decreed as caused by the fault of one spouse or the other, such fault as judicially determined to be the cause of the separation is normally determinative of the issue of whether the husband or wife is or is not at fault, for purposes of deciding whether the wife is entitled to alimony under art. 160. Thus, the husband in Fulmer was precluded from contesting his wife's right to post-divorce alimony, if she was in need, because of the judgment of separation in her favor based upon her husband's fault." Id. at p. 7.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “We have held that, under this statute respecting an award of alimony to a wife without "fault," the word "fault" contemplates conduct or substantial acts of commission or omission by the wife violative of her marital duties and responsibilities. A wife is not deprived of alimony after divorce simply because she was not totally blameless in the marital discord. Vicknair v. Vicknair, 237 La. 1032 , 112 So.2d 702 (1959); Davieson v. Trapp, 223 La. 776 , 66 So.2d 804 (1953); Breffeilh v. Breffeilh, 221 La. 843 , 60 So.2d 457 (1952); Adler v. Adler, 239 So.2d 494 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1970). To constitute fault, a wife's misconduct must not only be of a serious nature but must also be an independent contributory or proximate cause of the separation. Kendrick v. Kendrick, 236 La. 34 , 106 So.2d 707 (1958).”
    1 later decision 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.