Henry v. Henry’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 state decisions

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

1. “In a proceeding for divorce or thereafter, the court may award interim periodic support to a party or may award final periodic support to a party who is in need of support and who is free from fault prior to the filing of a proceeding to terminate the marriage in accordance with the following Articles.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 101 So. 3d 1122 - Harmon v. Harmon · 87 So. 3d 386 - Barlow v. Barlow

2. “A. When a spouse has not been at fault and is in need of support, based on the needs of that party and the ability of the other party to pay, that spouse may be awarded final periodic support in accordance with Paragraph B of this Article. |4B. The court shall consider all relevant factors in determining the amount and duration of final support. Those factors may include: (1) The income and means of the parties, including the liquidity of such means. (2) The financial obligations of the parties. (3) The earning capacity of the parties. (4) The effect of custody of children upon a party’s earning capacity. (5) The time necessary for the claimant to acquire appropriate education, training, or employment. (6) The health and age of the parties. (7) The duration of the marriage. (8)The tax consequences to either or both parties. C. The sum awarded under this Article shall not exceed one-third of the obligor’s net income.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 101 So. 3d 1122 - Harmon v. Harmon

3. ““It is well settled that a trial court’s factual findings regarding fault in the area of domestic relations are given great deference on review. If the trial court’s findings are reasonable, i.e. not manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong, then they will not be disturbed.” [Terry, 954 So.2d] at 793 (citing Coleman v. Coleman, 541 So.2d 1003 (La.App. 3 Cir.1989)). Henry v. Henry, 08-692, p. 2 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/10/08), 999 So.2d 255, 256-57 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 101 So. 3d 1122 - Harmon v. Harmon