green
Positive treatment
1.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1984
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rawlings v. Rawlings
(2×)
See, e.g., Cohn v. Cohn, 122 Ill.App.3d 763 , 78 Ill.Dec. 194, 197 , 461 N.E.2d 1028, 1031 (1984)(“respondent participated in the strike in ‘good faith’ and was therefore entitled to a reduction in child support reflective of his present ability to pay”); Sandra L. v. John L., 125 Misc.2d 858 , 480 N.Y.S.2d 291, 293 (N.Y.Fam.Ct.l984)(“[t]he exercise of a federally protected right ... may not be used against a worker to deny a reduction of his support obligation which would otherwise be granted for good cause”); see also O’Neal v. Wynn, 64 N.C.App. 149 , 306 S.E.2d 822, 824 (1983)…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
CHRISTINE O’NEAL, Formerly Christine O’Neal Wynn
v.
JON B. WYNN
v.
JON B. WYNN
505A83.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Apr 3, 1984.
Davis & Davis, by George Thomas Davis, Jr., for plaintiff-appellant.
,
Carter, Archie & Hassell, by Sid Hassell, Jr., for defendantappellee.
Per Curiam.
Cited by 11 opinions | Published
PER CURIAM.
The facts of this case are adequately stated in the majority opinion of the Court of Appeals. After a careful review of the briefs and oral arguments presented in this case, and the majority decision of the Court of Appeals, we have concluded that the rationale and supporting authorities cited in the majority decision constitute a correct statement of the law and a correct application[*622] of the law to the facts of this case. Therefore, we agree with the result reached by the majority in the Court of Appeals.
The decision of the Court of Appeals is
Affirmed.