Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 814 SE2D 423 - Moore v. Hullander.

Moore v. Hullander.’s Empirical Analysis

2018

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on West v. Clarke · Cason v. Cason · Viskup v. Viskup · 297 Ga. App. 703 - Moore v. Moore-McKinney · 275 Ga. App. 236 - Franklin Credit Management Corp. v. Friedenberg

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

  1. “[t]he court may assess reasonable and necessary attorney's fees and expenses of litigation in any civil action in any court of record if, upon the motion of any party or the court itself, it finds that an attorney or party brought or defended an action, or any part thereof, that lacked substantial justification or that the action, or any part thereof, was interposed for delay or harassment, or if it finds that an attorney or party unnecessarily expanded the proceeding by other improper conduct. As used in this Code section, lacked substantial justification means substantially frivolous, substantially groundless, or substantially vexatious.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “lump sum or unapportioned attorney fees awards are not permitted in Georgia, and we will vacate and remand for further factfinding where the trial court's order, on its face, fails to show the complex decision making process necessarily involved in reaching a particular dollar figure and fails to articulate why the court awarded one amount of fees rather than another under OCGA § 9-15-14 (b).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “attorney's fees as a part of the expenses of litigation, made at any time during the pendency of the litigation, whether the action is for alimony, divorce and alimony, or contempt of court arising out of either an alimony case or a divorce and alimony case, including but not limited to contempt of court orders involving property division, child custody, and child visitation rights.”
    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.