Brehm v. Brehm’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 549 So. 2d 840 - Rosell v. Esco · 403 So. 2d 56 - Curtis v. Curtis · 652 So. 2d 99 - Kambur v. Kambur · Berry v. Metropolitan Life Insurance · Obiago v. MERRILL-NATIONAL LABORATORY, INC.
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.
“A claimant spouse under LSA-C.C. art. 2368 has the burden of proving: (1) the property is separate, (2) the property increased in value, and (3) the increase in value was based on the uncompensated or undercompensated labor of the other spouse; the burden then shifts to the other spouse to prove that the increase in value was due to factors other than the uncompensated or undercompensated labor. Salley v. Salley, 95-0387 (La.10/16/95), 661 So.2d 437, 438 ; Krielow v. Krielow, 93-2539 (La.4/11/94), 635 So.2d 180, 183 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“If the separate property of a spouse has increased in value as a result of the uncompensated common labor or industry of the spouses, the other spouse is entitled to be reimbursed from the spouse whose property has increased in value one-half of the increase attributed to the common labor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[u]pon termination of the community, the other spouse is entitled to one-half of the amount or value that the community assets had at the time they were used”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McGee v. McGee
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.