Shewbart v. Shewbart’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 state decisions

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

1. “A petitioning spouse proves a need for periodic alimony by showing that without such financial support he or she will be unable to maintain the parties' former marital lifestyle.”

   13 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rodgers v. Rodgers · J.D.A. v. A.B.A.

2. “"The determination of whether the petitioning spouse has a need for periodic alimony, of whether the responding spouse has the ability to pay periodic alimony, and of whether equitable principles require adjustments to periodic alimony are all questions of fact for the trial court, Lawrence v. Lawrence , 455 So.2d 45 , 46 (Ala. Civ. App. 1984), with the last issue lying particularly within the discretion of the trial court. See Nolen v. Nolen , 398 So.2d 712 , 713-14 (Ala. Civ. App. 1981). On appeal from ore tenus proceedings, this court presumes that the trial court properly found the facts necessary to support its judgment and prudently exercised its discretion. G.G. v. R.S.G. , 668 So.2d 828 , 830 (Ala. Civ. App. 1995). That presumption may be overcome by a showing from the appellant that substantial evidence does not support those findings of fact, see § 12-21-12(a), Ala. Code 1975, or that the trial court otherwise acted arbitrarily, unjustly, or in contravention of the law. Dees v. Dees , 390 So.2d 1060 , 1064 (Ala. Civ. App. 1980)."”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Spuhl v. Spuhl · Meehan v. Meehan

3. ““2. The [former wife] filed a petition asking the Court to award her alimony based on her worsening economic condition and the improved economic condition of the [former husband]. “3. Testimony indicates that the [former wife] quit her job about a year ago. She was working with her brother at that time. The [former wife] has been unemployed since that time. The [former wife] maintains that she is disabled. However, she has not filed for disability with the Social Security Administration. The [former wife] states that she has plans to do so, but has had trouble understanding the forms and plans to go to the Social Security Office for help. “4. The [former wife] is now living in a government subsidized apartment. The [former wife] has received one-half the proceeds from the sale of the marital home. She resided in the marital residence until the sale of the residence after the parties’ daughter reached majority age. “5. Testimony indicates that the [former husband] is still self-employed in the restaurant business. His income is consistent with the amount at the time of the divorce trial. “6. The Court is not inclined to award alimony at this time based on the [former wife] terminating her employment and taking no steps to apply for Social Security disability. The [former wife] very well may be disabled but is taking no steps at this time to pursue the matter. “It is therefore ORDERED that the requested relief is DENIED. The Court retains jurisdiction to award periodic alimony ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Shewbart v. Shewbart