Holley v. Holley’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
September 2004
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Armstrong v. Armstrong · 639 So. 2d 909 - Hemsley v. Hemsley · 610 So. 2d 348 - Tilley v. Tilley · 732 So. 2d 876 - Kilpatrick v. Kilpatrick · 562 So. 2d 79 - Gray v. Gray
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.
“Factors to be considered in the determination of alimony are set forth in Armstrong v. Armstrong, 618 So.2d 1278 (Miss.1993) and Hemsley v. Hemsley, 639 So.2d 909 (Miss.1994). The Court finds that Wanda is entitled to periodic alimony while she is adjusting to a new life of financial independence and providing care for the children. Accordingly, she is awarded periodic alimony of $2,000 per month for a period of sixty (60) months beginning on the first day of March 2002, and continuing on the first day of the next fifty-nine (59) months thereafter. This alimony obligation shall terminate upon Wanda's remarriage or the death of either party.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“When the entirety of the record is carefully reviewed, the evidence is inconsistent with an award of alimony. The chancellor's decision to award alimony was therefore manifest error, accordingly, we reverse and render the award of alimony.”
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.