Wellner v. Wellner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The Divorce Code defines “separate and apart” as follows: “Complete cessation of any and all cohabitation, whether living in the same residence or not.” 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 3103. In Thomas v. Thomas, 335 Pa.Super. 41 , 483 A.2d 945 (1984), this court held that “cohabitation” means “the mutual assumption of those rights and duties attendant to the relationship of husband and wife.” Id., at 47 , 483 A.2d at 948 . Thus, the gravamen of the phrase “separate and apart” becomes the existence of separate lives not separate roofs (citations omitted). This position follows the trend of Pennsylvania case law in which a common residence is not a bar to showing that the parties live separate and apart ... Flynn v. Flynn, 341 Pa.Super. 76, 81 , 491 A.2d 156, 159 (1985). Compare Mackey v. Mackey, 376 Pa.Super. 146 , 545 A.2d 362 (1988) (where parties had private living quarters, no public social life together, and had ceased sexual relations, the parties lived “separate and apart” despite the fact that they resided in the same house) with Britton v. Britton, 400 Pa.Super. 43 , 582 A.2d 1335 (1990) (where parties jointly purchased a townhouse, shared a joint checking account, had a social life as husband and wife, share the same bedroom and resumed sexual relations, the court found the parties were not living “separate and apart”).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2004 Pa. Super. 313 - Teodorski v. Teodorski