155 So. 3d 777 - Boatwright v. Boatwright’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
June 2015
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Perkins v. Perkins · 890 So. 2d 806 - Mabus v. Mabus · Montgomery v. Montgomery · King v. King · 749 So. 2d 47 - Bang v. Pittman
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“On May 12, 2004, Judge Edwin Roberts of the Marshall County Chancery Court granted Grace Bonds Boatwright and Toulman D. Boatwright Jr. a divorce on the ground of irreconcilable differences. Grace was awarded primary physical custody of the couple’s three minor children, Wynne, Hannah, and Dunn. Toulman was ordered to pay $320 per month in child support, as well-as $80 per month for health insurance, one-half of the out-of-pocket medical expenses, and a portion of the children’s school tuition. Toulman was also ordered to maintain a life-insurance policy with the three children as beneficiaries. Since the divorce decree, the relationship between Grace and Toulman has deteriorated such that the parties have been unwilling to communicate, resulting in the filing of numerous motions and petitions over the years. The instant case stems from a petition for contempt and modification filed by Grace on October 19, 2007. An agreed temporary order was entered that, among other things, gave Toulman additional visitation with Hannah and appointed Jennifer Shackelford as guardian ad litem (GAL) for the children. On May 20, 2008, Grace filed a motion for emergency relief alleging that recordings between Toulman and Hannah, who was sixteen years old at the time, evidenced that Toulman’s visitation -with his minor children should be restricted. These recordings indicate a desire on Toulmaris behalf and a willingness on Hannah’s behalf that Hannah engage in violent activities against Grace an”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.