8 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 45 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 Srinivasan v. Srinivasan.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Srinivasan v. Srinivasan Anchor | green | “fashioning an equitable distribution award lies within the sound discretion of the trial judge . . . .” | 11 |
| 2 | Taylor v. Taylor | green | “need not quantify or elaborate exactly what weight was given to each of the factors” | 7 |
| 3 | Estate of Hackler v. Hackler | green | “we find the litigation addressed appropriate and substantial issues and that husband did not generate unnecessary delay or expense in pursuit of his interests.” | 6 |
| 4 | Estate of Hackler v. Hackler | green | “the litigation addressed appropriate and substantial issues and that neither party generated unnecessary delay or expense in pursuit of its interests.” | 6 |
| 5 | Alphin v. Alphin | green | “where, as here, the court hears the evidence ore tenus, its findings are entitled to great weight and will not be disturbed on appeal unless plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.” | 5 |
| 6 | Taylor v. Taylor | green | “the court need not quantify or elaborate exactly what weight was given to each of the factors,” | 3 |
| 7 | Stumbo v. Stumbo | green | “when considering whether to make an equitable distribution award, the court must first classify and value the parties' marital and separate property.” | 2 |
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.