Cressend v. Cressend’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
November 1999
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 302 So. 2d 903 - Frederic v. Frederic · Hegre v. Hegre · 357 So. 2d 90 - Boisfontaine v. Boisfontaine · Gros v. Gros · 422 So. 2d 544 - Danforth v. Danforth
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) The income, means, and assets of the spouses; (b) The liquidity of such assets; (c) The financial obligations of the spouses, including their earning capacity; (d) The effect of custody of children of the marriage upon the spouse’s earning capacity; (e) The time necessary for the recipient to acquire appropriate education, training, or employment; (f) The health and age of the parties and their obligations to support or care for dependent children; and (g) Any other circumstances that the court deems relevant. (3) In determining whether the claimant spouse is entitled to alimony, the court shall consider his or her earning capability, in light of all other circumstances.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Solomito v. Solomito
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.