Ernst v. Ernst’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently November 2001
4 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 173 Ind. App. 661 - Wilcox v. Wilcox · Briggs v. Clinton County Bank & Trust Co. of Frankfort · Marriage of McBride v. McBride · In Re the Marriage of Julien · Canaday v. Canaday
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The contribution of each spouse to the acquisition of the property, regardless of whether the contribution was income producing. (2) The extent to which the property was acquired by each spouse prior to the marriage or through inheritance or gift. (3) The economic circumstances of each spouse at the time the disposition of the property is to become effective, including the desirability of awarding the family residence or the right to dwell in that residence for such periods as the court may deem just to the spouse having custody of any children. (4) The conduct of the parties during the marriage as related to the disposition or dissipation of their property. (5) The earnings or earning ability of the parties as related to final division of property and final determination of the property rights of the parties.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Porter v. Porter“will not reverse a judgment on the basis of conflicting evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Houchens v. Boschert
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.