8 Neb. Ct. App. 242 - Parde v. Parde’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[The husband] and Burlington [Northern] allocated the sum of approximately $54,000 for “time lost” for the time period from July 1, 1992, through May 31, 1996. . . . If we accept the $54,000 allocation and additionally assume that [the husband] earned no wages between May 31,1996, and the date of the divorce decree (an assumption favoring [the wife] as it is clear that at some point [the husband] was reemployed), approximately another $35,000 would be attributable to lost wages, again based on a $30,000 annual income. This results in a total amount of lost wages for the period of July 1992 through August 1997 of roughly $89,000 ($54,000 plus $35,000), leaving approximately $156,500 of the total settlement remaining as compensation for [the husband’s] future losses as of the time of the divorce. If we entirely ignore the Release’s allocation of [the husband’s] lost wages for the stated time period, we reach a similar conclusion. At the time of this settlement, [the husband’s] worklife was approximately 22 years. If we simply divide the $245,294 balance remaining as of August 1992 by 22 years, thus attributing that entire amount to future lost wages and none of it to nonmarital pain and suffering, one arrives at a figure of slightly over $11,000 per year. This establishes an annual figure designed to compensate for [the husband’s] lost earnings or diminished capacity from age 40 in August 1992 through age 62. At that rate, some $55,000 to $60,000 of the remaining compensation w”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Parde v. Parde