81 So. 3d 262 - Williamson v. Williamson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) the health of the husband and his earning capacity; (2) the health of the wife and her- earning capacity; (3) the entire sources of income and expenses of both parties; (4) the reasonable needs of the wife; (5) the reasonable needs of the child; (6) the necessary living expenses of ■ the husband; (7) the - estimated amount of income taxes the respective parties must pay on their, incomes; (8) the fact that the wife has the free use of the .home, furnishings.- and automobile; (9) the length of the marriage; (10) the presence or absence of minor children in the -home; (11) the standard of living of the parties, both during the marriage and at the time of the support determination; (12) fault or misconduct;.-(13) -wasteful dissipation of assets; (14) the obligations and assets of each: party; (15) the age of the parties; (16) the tax consequences of the spousal support order; and (17) such other facts and circumstances bearing on the subject that might, be shown by -the evidence.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. John F. Layton, Jr. v. Amanda Reece Layton · Strickland v. Strickland

2. “Division of marital assets is now governed under the law as stated in Hemsley [v. Hemsley, 639 So.2d 909 (Miss.1994) ] and Ferguson [v. Ferguson, 639 So.2d 921 (Miss.1994) ]. First, the character of the parties’ assets, i.e., marital or non-marital, must be determined pursuant to Hemsley. The marital property is then equitably divided, employing the Ferguson factors as guidelines, in light of each parties’ non-marital property. If there are sufficient marital assets which, when equitably divided and considered with each spouse’s non-marital assets, will adequately provide for both parties, no more need be done. If the situation is such that an equitable division of marital property, considered with each party’s non-marital assets, leaves a deficit for one party, then alimony based on the value of non-marital assets should be considered.”

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

3. “Contempt matters are committed to the substantial discretion of the trial court[,] which, by institutional circumstance and both temporal and visual proximity, is infinitely more competent to decide the matter than are we.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 250 So. 3d 1271 - Michael Chadwick Smith v. Kimberly Marie Mull