Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 641 SW2D 195 - Peirick v. Peirick

Peirick v. Peirick’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
3
states following
June 2007
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently June 2007

22 state decisions

100198219902000decided

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 State Ex Rel. Conant v. Trimble · Carter v. Boone County Trust Co. · Markwardt v. Markwardt · STATE EX REL. DINERS'FINANCIAL CORPORATION v. Swink · Levine v. Empire Savings and Loan Association

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

  1. “In the administration of justice and the prompt dispatch of business, courts must and do act upon the statements of counsel and upon the stipulations of parties to pending causes. Where the parties have voluntarily entered into a stipulation, which appears fair and reasonable for the compromise and settlement of the issues of a pending cause, and where the stipulation is spread upon the record with the consent and approval of the court, as here, the parties are bound thereby and the court may, thereafter, properly proceed to dispose of the case upon the basis of the pleadings, the stipulation and admitted facts.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[Wife] mistakes the applicable standard for the trial court’s review of the parties’ property settlement. The “relevant factors” in § 452.330.-1 apply when in the absence of any agreement the trial court must “divide the marital property in such proportions as the court deems just....” Here, however, the property division was made by the parties’ agreement, and the trial court was bound by that agreement unless the agreement is unconseionable[.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “an inequality so strong, gross, and manifest that it must be impossible to state it to one with common sense without producing an exclamation at the inequality of it.”
    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.