Dash v. Dash’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 state decisions

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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"[A]ppellant is not the proper subject for rehabilitative alimony. * * * * * * "We do not think that the record demonstrates that appellant may be rehabilitated to support herself within three years or at any other foreseeable time. "An award of rehabilitative alimony calls for a relative assessment of the wife's needs and the husband's ability to pay." Id. at 408-409 ;”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Patterson v. Patterson · 308 So. 2d 106 - Keller v. Keller

2. “"The factual situation in the instant cause is similar to Sommers v. Sommers, Fla.App. 1964, 169 So.2d 496 . There the parties were married twelve years. The wife was awarded $18,000.00 as lump sum alimony and she maintained this was inadequate. The husband was a successful ladies' dress manufacturer who, upon selling out his business had over $250,000.00 in liquid assets and was the owner of a $30,000.00 home. The wife, in her fifties, had one operation due to a cancer condition. This court said that conservatively assuming that the wife required a minimum of $250.00 a month for support, the award would be exhausted in six years. We noted that the record did not show that the wife would not need support for a longer period of time nor that there was a good reason to terminate her support after six years." 284 So.2d at 409-410.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 308 So. 2d 106 - Keller v. Keller

3. “"`Where the head of a family by supplying money over a period of years, establishes and maintains a standard of living on a certain financial level, it may be inferred, in the absence of a sufficient showing to the contrary, that he has a source of income or financial status sufficient to enable him to continue to maintain his spouse in substantially the same manner of living.' See also Massey v. Massey, Fla.App. 1967, 205 So.2d 1 ." 284 So.2d at 409.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 308 So. 2d 106 - Keller v. Keller