Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 660 SO2D 134 - Woods v. Woods

Woods v. Woods’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
April 2005
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 324 So. 2d 494 - Garrett v. Garrett · 337 So. 2d 289 - Barham v. Barham · Halverson v. Halverson · Jordan v. Jordan · State ex rel. Fonseca v. Phelps

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

  1. “The motives and intentions of the parties to restore and renew the marital relationship is a question of fact determined by the trial judge from the totality of the circumstances.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The issue of reconciliation logically should be addressed only after determining whether the parties have, in fact, lived separate and apart continuously since the filing of the petition at least 180 days earlier.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “The necessary intent must be possessed by both parties, not just one.”
    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.