Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 615 S.W.2d 696 - Murff v. Murff

Murff v. Murff’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

234
cited by 234 later decisions
3
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

234 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 234 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Bocquet v. Herring (1998), Twyman v. Twyman (1993)

234 state decisions

6501981199020002010decided

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 Hedtke v. Hedtke · Carle v. Carle · Crooker v. California · Bell v. Bell · Cooper v. Cooper

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

  1. “In a decree of divorce or annulment the court shall order a division of the estate of the parties in a manner that the court deems just and right, having due regard for the rights of each party and any children of the marriage.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"... the trial court may consider such factors as the spouses’ capacities and abilities, benefits which the party not at fault would have derived from continuation of the marriage, business opportunities, education, relative physical conditions, relative financial condition and obligations, disparity of ages, size of separate estates, and the nature of the property. We believe that the consideration of such factors by the trial court is proper in making a “just and right” division of the property”.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The trial court in a divorce case has the opportunity to observe the parties on the witness stand, determine their credibility, evaluate their needs and potentials, both social and economic. As the trier of fact, the court is empowered to use its legal knowledge and its human understanding and experience. Although many divorce cases have similarities, no two of them are exactly alike. Mathematical precision in dividing property in a divorce is usually not possible. Wide latitude and discretion rests in these trial courts and that discretion should only be disturbed in case of clear abuse.”
    3 later decisions 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.