618 So. 2d 108 - Gardner v. Gardner’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2012 · most notably 626 So. 2d 140 - Daigle v. Daigle (1993), Perkins v. Perkins (2001)
28 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 498 So. 2d 328 - Dillon v. Dillon · Rainey v. Rainey · 609 So. 2d 426 - Rawson v. Buta · Anderson v. Anderson · 297 So. 2d 900 - Wires v. Wires
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“either endanger[s] life, limb, or health, or create[s] a reasonable apprehension of such danger, rendering the relationship unsafe for the party seeking relief, or in the alternative, be so unnatural and infamous as to make the marriage revolting to the offending spouse and render it impossible for that spouse to discharge the duties of the marriage, thus destroying the basis for its continuance.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“means something more than unkindness or rudeness or mere incompatibility or want of affection.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“THE COURT: Very Well. Mrs. Shavers, do you tell me that there have been problems, arguments, fights, disputes, disagreements and the like during the course of this marriage that now convince you that you want the marriage to be ended and over with. Is that true? MRS. SHAVERS: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Do you feel that if you stayed in the marriage that it would be hazardous or injurious to your life, safety, health and that's either physically or emotionally. Do you feel that way? MRS. SHAVERS: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Do you now feel that it's in your best interest to be divorced, finally? MRS. SHAVERS: Yes, I do? THE COURT: All right. Okay. With that being said, I'm going to take into consideration all of the previous testimony that I have heard in the course of the trial including any and all motions in the temporary hearing and based on that and the facts contained therein, I do hereby grant the divorce on the statutory grounds of habitual, Cruel and Inhuman Treatment and that divorce is awarded to Wife. The parties have reserved the right to present me an Irreconcilable Differences Judgment and Property Settlement Agreement and I will allow them to do that.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shavers v. Shavers
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.