Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 714 So. 2d 231 - Head v. Head

714 So. 2d 231 - Head v. Head’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently February 2019

18 state decisions

100199820002010decided

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 586 So. 2d 118 - Hare v. Hodgins · 618 So. 2d 579 - Goodwin v. Goodwin · 694 So. 2d 613 - Chance v. Chance · 533 So. 2d 1009 - Godwin v. Godwin · Moody v. Moody

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

  1. “Generally, the trier of fact is not bound by expert testimony, but is- to hear and weigh expert testimony in the same manner as any other evidence. Reasonable and well-founded opinion should be considered. The weight to be given expert testimony is dependent upon the professional qualifications- and experience of the expert and especially on the facts on which that expert’s opinion is based. The fact-trier is entitled to assess the credibility and accept the opinion of an expert just as with other witnesses, unless the stated reasons of the expert are patently unsound. The effect and weight to be given the expert’s testimony depends upon the validity of the underlying facts relied upon by the expert, and rests within the broad discretion of the trial judge. (Internal citations omitted).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Business valuations methods are not an exact science and are basically guides to determine a fair market value for buyers and sellers of a given business. Here, the evaluation is made for the purpose of resolving community property disputes. Given the dynamics of businesses and business practices, factoring in circumstances that may be unique to the parties, an inflexible formula for determining value is said to be impractical.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[u]nder Louisiana matrimonial regime law, goodwill is recognized as an incidental property right in connection with commercial businesses which [are] capable of sale and transfer from one owner to another.”
    2 later decisions 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.