Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 78 CONNAPP 734 - Richards v. Richards

Richards v. Richards’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
April 2020
most recently cited

2 district · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably 80 Conn. App. 286 - Behrns v. Behrns (2003), Bruno v. Bruno (2013)

2 district · 32 state decisions

160200320102020decided

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

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 1361

Relies on Strobel v. Strobel · Kenworthy v. Kenworthy · Tobey v. Tobey · Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. Costle · Gillis v. Gillis

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

  1. “we apply our clearly erroneous standard, which is the well settled standard for reviewing a trial court's factual findings.... A factual finding is clearly erroneous when it is not supported by any evidence in the record or when there is evidence to support it, but the reviewing court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[A] unilateral mistake will not be sufficient to open the judgment.”
    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.