65 N.C. App. 657 - Plott v. Plott’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(b) In the absence of pleading and proof that the circumstances otherwise warrant, the father and mother shall be primarily liable for the support of a minor child .... Such other circumstances may include, but shall not be limited to, the relative ability of all the above-mentioned parties to provide support or the inability of one or more of them to provide support, and the needs and estate of the child. The judge may enter an order requiring any one or more of the above-mentioned parties to provide for the support of the child as may be appropriate in the particular case ....”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Plott v. Plott · 81 N.C. App. 247 - Rice v. Rice

2. “(5) The gross income of the plaintiff is $2,916.67 per month; that the plaintiffs net income after taxes is $1,980.65; that the reasonable living expenses of the plaintiff, including payments due on the outstanding loans, are $1,114.25 per month; that the available income of the plaintiff over and above his reasonable expenses is approximately $886.00 per month; (6) The gross income of the defendant is $1,285.00 per month; that the defendant’s net income after taxes if (sic) $957.48 per month; that the reasonable living expenses of the defendant, including payments due on outstanding loans, is $777.00 per month; that the available income of the defendant over and above her reasonable expenses is approximately $180.00 per month; (7) The reasonable needs of the minor child of the parties for health, education and maintenance is approximately $625.00 per month .... (10) . . . that the plaintiff further provides child care and homemaker contributions in the homeplace of the plaintiff and minor child of a value of approximately $130.00 per month; (12) The relative ability of the plaintiff to provide support for the minor child of the parties is approximately four times the ability of the defendant to provide said support; (13) Neither party presented evidence concerning his or her estate, and the Court, therefore, did not take into consideration the estates of the parties in entering its order herein; (14) The reasonable expenses of the parties and the child referred to above repr”

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

3. “A close examination of the record indicates that the trial court arrived at these figures by using the gross income figures supplied by the parties and then adding their indicated deductions for loans, savings, and retirement back into the net income figure supplied by the parties, but later subtracting these items again as part of the parties’ reasonable monthly expenses. However, while the trial judge apparently accepted all of plaintiffs listed expenses as reason able, including his payroll savings deductions of $175.00 per month, only $567.00 of defendant’s listed expenses of $747.00 were found to be reasonable. Without a specific finding of fact indicating why, under the circumstances, defendant’s itemized personal expenses were not reasonable, this Court cannot adequately make its determination whether the order predicating the amount of liability upon an analysis of the balance sheets of the respective parties is adequately supported by competent evidence.”

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