478 So. 2d 356 - Boyd v. Boyd’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently July 2015
10 state decisions
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 · Davis v. Davis · 360 So. 2d 1244 - Miles v. State · 64 So. 2d 281 - Underwood v. Underwood · Cann v. Cann
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“By definition, 'lump-sum alimony' is a fixed and certain amount, the right to which is vested in the recipient and which is not therefore subject to increase, reduction, or termination in the event of any contingency, specifically including those of death or remarriage.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Hinson v. Comm'r · Banach v. Comm'r“[T]here does arise upon the entry of a final judgment of a lump sum award a vested right which is neither terminable upon a spouse's remarriage or death nor subject to modification.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“determined not by what [something] is called, but by what it does”
2 later decisions 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.