68 N.C. App. 566 - Gibson v. Gibson’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably 168 N.C. App. 283 - Spicer v. Spicer (2005), 152 N.C. App. 438 - Leary v. Leary (2002)
25 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 Coble v. Coble · Beall v. Beall · Hudson v. Hudson · 52 N.C. App. 104 - Jones v. Jones · 61 N.C. App. 438 - Evans v. Craddock
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under the principles set forth in Hudson , supra , however, this action is one for support only and the additional finding requirement of G.S. 50-13.6 is thereby invoked. Our examination of the judgment discloses that the trial court did not find that plaintiff has refused to provide adequate support under the circumstances existing at the time the action was initiated. Such a finding is required in order to award attorney's fees in this case. Its absence compels us to vacate the award of attorney's fees and remand this case for additional findings as required by G.S. 50-13.6. We note incidentally that the expenses on which the award of counsel fees was based appear to relate solely to defendant's child support claim.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In an action or proceeding for the custody or support, or both, of a minor child, including a motion in the cause for the modification or revocation of an existing order for custody or support, or both, the court may in its discretion order payment of reasonable attorney’s fees to an interested party acting in good faith who has insufficient means to defray the expense of the suit. Before ordering payment of a fee in a support action, the court must find as a fact that the party ordered to furnish support has refused to provide support which is adequate under the circumstances existing at the time of the institution of the action or proceeding. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Theokas v. Theokas“The purpose of the requirement that the court make findings of those specific facts which support its ultimate disposition of the case is to allow a reviewing court to determine from the record whether the judgment and the legal conclusions which underlie it represent a correct application of the law.... Effective appellate review of an order entered by a trial court sitting without a jury is largely dependent upon the specificity by which the order's rationale is articulated.”
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.