Clark v. Clark

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding a party’s domicile does not change because of a brief and temporary absence from a jurisdiction
• two-week trip to Pennsylvania during the 90 days prior to divorce filing did not change Arizona domicile

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• J.D.S. v. Franks
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1995-04-11· cited 37×
• St. Joseph's Hospital & Medical Center v. Maricopa County
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1984-09-26· cited 22×
• In re the Appeal in Coconino County Juvenile Action No. J-12187
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1994-11-29· cited 1×
• In Re the Marriage of Rendon Quijada & Pimienta Dominguez
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2023-06-15· cited 1×
• In Re the Marriage of quijada/dominguez
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2024-06-18

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Smith v. Smith
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1977-05-26· cited 33×
• Arizona Board of Regents v. Harper
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1972-04-06· cited 31×
• Hendrie Buick Company v. MacK
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1960-10-05· cited 24×
• Hall v. Bowman
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1960-11-23· cited 12×
• Walker v. Walker
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1972-09-12· cited 11×