Wade v. Wade’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently October 1997
15 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 Frankel v. Heym · 27 Ariz. App. 266 - Jarvis v. Jarvis · 321 F. Supp. 1331 - Frankel v. United States · Sango v. Sango · 151 Cal. App. 2d 237 - Scarlett v. Scarlett
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The order giving a judgment for $985.00 for delinquent support and providing for its payment in installments is likewise error. Generally there could be no judgment payable in installments with certain notable exceptions such as child support and alimony payments in a divorce decree. A judgment for support arrearages does not fall under that exception. Delinquent support payments must be computed and judgment entered for that amount. Pro viding the manner in which the judgment is to be collected amounts to an impermissible retroactive modification of the decree (citing cases). In addition such ah order limits Carolyn’s right to pursue statutory provisional remedies to collect [a] judgment. These remedies are inherent in the judgment itself.” (Emphasis added; footnotes omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Williams v. Budke
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.