Busse v. Busse’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently July 2024
14 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 Sutliff v. Sutliff · 357 Pa. Super. 483 - Campbell v. Campbell · 449 Pa. Super. 209 - Litmans v. Litmans · Drake v. Drake · 355 Pa. Super. 64 - Winters v. Winters
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]n ruling on a claim for alimony pen-dente lite, the court should consider the following factors: the ability of the other party to pay; the separate estate and income of the petitioning party; and the character, situation, and surroundings of the parties.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“the payor's ability to pay, the requesting party's financial resources, the value of the services rendered, and the property received in equitable distribution.”
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.