Hall v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently September 2025 · most notably 2008 UT App 11 - Stonehocker v. Stonehocker (2008), 2010 UT App 139 - Connell v. Connell (2010)
48 state decisions
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
Relies on State v. Ramirez · State v. Copeland · Davis v. Meno Guaranty Bank of Meno · Smith v. State · Burt v. Burt
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Unstated findings can be implied if it is reasonable to assume that the trial court actually considered the controverted evidence and necessarily made a finding to resolve the controversy, but simply failed to record the factual determination it made.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Hill v. Hill · Stephens v. Stephens“Although the trial court found that appellant is currently earning less than he was previously, that isolated finding does not answer the critical question of whether the drop in earnings was voluntary. Rather, appellant's current earnings, as compared to his historical income, is merely one element in the matrix of factual issues affecting the ultimate finding of whether appellant is underemployed. Many critical questions are left unanswered: What are appellant's abilities? Is appellant's current salary below the prevailing market for a person with his abilities? Are there any job openings for a person with appellant's abilities? At a minimum, the trial court must determine appellant's employment capacity and earnings potential ... before it [can] logically conclude that he is, in fact, underemployed.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Hill v. Hill · Rayner v. Rayner“Findings are adequate only if they are sufficiently detailed and include enough subsidiary facts to disclose the steps by which the ultimate conclusion on each factual issue was reached.”
3 later decisions 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.