Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 394 SO2D 465 - Baker v. Baker

Baker v. Baker’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
states following
June 2010
most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently June 2010 · most notably Petracca v. Petracca (1998), O'Connor v. O'Connor (1983)

26 state decisions

1501981199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on 382 So. 2d 1197 - Canakaris v. Canakaris · 64 So. 2d 281 - Underwood v. Underwood · Del Vecchio v. Del Vecchio · City of Miami Beach v. G. A. P. Company, Inc. · 345 So. 2d 747 - Schwab v. Tolley

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

  1. “`findings of the trial court come to this court clothed with a presumption of correctness and will not be disturbed absent a showing that there was no competent evidence to sustain them.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a high degree of good faith and candor in all matters bearing upon the contract,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “To modify or set aside a property settlement agreement, it is incumbent upon the party seeking to abrogate the agreement to allege and prove fraud, duress, deceit, coercion or overreaching by the other party... . Case law suggests two methods, one direct and one indirect. The direct method involves affirmative proof of fraud, misstatements, deceit, etc. The indirect method allows the party seeking to invalidate a property settlement agreement to prove that the agreement is unreasonable on its face. Thereupon, a presumption arises that the opposite party concealed his assets. This, in turn, shifts the burden of proof to the defendant party to establish the validity of the agreement. Del Vecchio v. Del Vecchio, 143 So.2d 17 (Fla. 1962).”
    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.