Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 537 NE2D 554 - Euler v. Euler

Euler v. Euler’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
July 2004
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently July 2004

19 state decisions

170198919902000decided

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 Chestnut v. Chestnut · Olds v. Olds · Schnarr v. Schnarr

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

  1. “"(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 cireumstances 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 a final division of property and final determination of the property rights of the parties."”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Although the trial court, in the exercise of its discretion, can divide the marital property unequally, the dissolution decree in this case indicates no reason for straying from the presumption of equality. We believe that Ind.Code § 381-1, 11.5-11(c) requires the trial court to set forth the basis for a division of marital property which does not follow the fifty-fifty presumption.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “for the trial court to divide the marital property equally or to set forth its rationale for dividing the property unequally.”
    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.