Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 386 SO2D 1294 - Nusbaum v. Nusbaum

Nusbaum v. Nusbaum’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
December 1987
most recently cited

7 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 382 So. 2d 1197 - Canakaris v. Canakaris · 335 So. 2d 5 - Shannon v. State · 39 So. 2d 554 - Yandell v. Yandell · Caidin v. Caidin · Simpson v. Simpson

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

  1. “The Canakaris Court [ Canakarias v. Canakarias, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)] pointed out that in making the determination to award lump sum alimony the trial judge is exercising a broad discretion to ensure equity and justice between the parties. Appellate courts were admonished to exercise restraint and caution in reviewing the trial court's exercise of its discretion and to keep hands off unless that discretion is exercised in an arbitrary, fanciful or unreasonable way.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a trial judge must ensure that neither spouse passes automatically from misfortune to prosperity or from prosperity to misfortune, and, in viewing the totality of the circumstances, one spouse should not be `shortchanged.'”
    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.