Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 922 P.2d 615 - Gray v. Gray

Gray v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
3
states following
April 2023
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently April 2023

14 state decisions

601996200020102020decided

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

Applies 38 U.S.C. § 3101 · 38 U.S.C. § 5301 · 42 U.S.C. § 407 (§ 207 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Porter v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. · Carrier v. Bryant · Johnson v. Johnson · Thielenhaus v. Thielenhaus · Manhart v. Manhart

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.

  1. “... As to such property, whether real or personal, which has been acquired by the parties jointly during their marriage, whether the title thereto be in either or both of said parties, the court shall, subject to a valid antenuptial contract in writing, make such division between the parties as may appear just and reasonable, by a division of the property in kind, or by setting the same apart to one of the parties, and requiring die other thereof to be paid such sum as may be just and proper to effect a fair and just division thereof.... (emphasis supplied).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “... The trial court has wide latitude in determining what part of jointly acquired property shall be awarded to each party.... An appellate court will not disturb the trial court's property division absent a finding of abuse of discretion or a finding that the decision is clearly contrary to the weight of the evidence.... [Footnotes omitted.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “... The court shall enter its decree confirming in each spouse the property owned by him or her before marriage and the undisposed-of property acquired after marriage by him or her in his or her own right. Either spouse may be allowed such alimony out of real and personal property of the other as the court shall think reasonable, having due regard to the value of such property at the time of the divorce. Alimony may be allowed from real or personal property, or both, or in the form of money judgment, payable either in gross or in installments, as the court may deem just and equitable. As to such property, whether real or personal, which has been acquired by the parties jointly during their marriage, whether the title thereto be in either or both of said parties, the court shall, subject to a valid antenuptial contract in writing, make such division between the parties as may appear just and reasonable, by a division of the property in kind, or by setting the same apart to one of the parties, and requiring the other thereof to be paid such sum as may be just and proper to effect a fair and just division thereof. ...”
    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.