400 So. 2d 32 - Meltzer v. Meltzer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It is indeed the case that both Meltzer v. Meltzer, supra, at 356 So.2d 1263, 1266 [Fla. 3d DCA 1978], and the earlier decision in Meltzer v. Meltzer, 262 So.2d 470, 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972), held that any increase should take effect from the date that the respective application for modification was filed. But it is obvious that each case was based on the determination, as stated at 262 So.2d 472 , that "[t]he evidence is clear that the needs of the children existed as of the date of the filing of the petition."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 503 So. 2d 932 - Bloom v. Bloom

2. “Under these circumstances, we hold that full retroactivity was not required as a matter of law, and that the trial court did not abuse the discretion it possesses in fixing the degree and extent to which a modification should be given preorder effect.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 503 So. 2d 932 - Bloom v. Bloom

3. “[t]he evidence is clear that the needs of the children existed as of the date of the filing of the petition.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 503 So. 2d 932 - Bloom v. Bloom