803 So. 2d 50 - Williams v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “• “A spouse claiming the inability to work for the purpose of computing alimony bears the burden of proving that disability by a preponderance of the evidence;” • The spouse’s “own self-serving testimony regarding his or her inability to work is insufficient proof of the inability;” | it* The spouse claiming such an inability must present corroborating evidence, such as a certified doctor’s report or a doctor’s expert testimony; • “Except perhaps in a case where the spouse’s obvious mental or physical disability renders that spouse impaired, a trial court abuses its discretion in finding that a spouse is unable to work on the basis of that spouse’s own self-serving testimony alone;” • When a non-working spouse fails to establish an inability to work, the trial court is required to impute some income to that spouse; and • “In determining the amount of income to impute to such a non-working spouse claiming alimony, the trial court should consider that spouse’s employment history, physical and mental health, age, and education. La. C.C. art. 112.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Williams v. Poore · 102 So. 3d 193 - Rusk v. Rusk