644 So. 2d 269 - Powell v. Powell’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably Leaf River Forest Products, Inc. v. Deakle (1995), 824 So. 2d 604 - Dennis v. Dennis (2002)
34 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 Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · 418 So. 2d 764 - McKee v. McKee · 607 So. 2d 1184 - Wallace v. State · 595 So. 2d 1310 - Roberson v. State · 599 So. 2d 529 - Smith v. Dorsey
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... summons shall issue commanding the defendant or respondent to appear and defend at a time and place, either in term time or vacation, at which the same shall be heard.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) increased needs of children due to advanced age and maturity, (2) increase in expenses, (3) inflation, (4) relative financial condition and earning capacity of the parties, (5) health and special medical needs of the child, both physical and psychological, (6) health and special medical needs of the parents, both physical and psychological, (7) necessary living expenses of the father, (8) estimated amount of income tax each party must pay, (9) free use of residence, furnishings and automobile, and (10) other facts and circumstances bearing on the support as shown by the evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Although a Rule 81 summons must be served and personal jurisdiction is not lost once a court has personal jurisdiction over the defendant at the time of the divorce, Rule 81 matters (such as contempt), because of their nature, require special notice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.