3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 25 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Amanda Swanson Niblett v. Jason Daniel Niblett.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Amanda Swanson Niblett v. Jason Daniel Niblett Anchor | green | “the determination of child support is a matter of discretion for the circuit court, and therefore we will not disturb its judgment on appeal unless plainly wrong or unsupported by the evidence.” | 13 |
| 2 | Kirk T. Milam v. Sheila J. Milam | green | “the issue of a party's income is a question of fact that we will not disturb unless it is plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.” | 6 |
| 3 | Amanda Swanson Niblett v. Jason Daniel Niblett | green | “child support decisions . . . 'typically involve fact-specific decisions best left in the "sound discretion” | 6 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.