691 So. 2d 678 - Wascom v. Wascom’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
August 2008
most recently cited
13 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on McAlpine v. McAlpine · Player v. Player · Nungesser v. Nungesser · Cassidy v. Cassidy · 558 So. 2d 695 - Nungesser v. Nungesser
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If the spouse has not a sufficient income for maintenance pending suit for divorce, the judge may allow the claimant spouse, whether plaintiff or defendant, a sum for that spouse’s support, proportioned to the needs of the claimant spouse and the means of the other spouse. [Emphasis added.] 2”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sharp v. Sharp“Alimony pendente lite ... may not be awarded for any period after the rendition of a final judgment of divorce because the divorce terminates the marriage and, along with it, the obligation of mutual support underlying the concept of alimony pendente lite.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“alimony pendente lite is based on the statutorily imposed duty of the spouses to support each other during [the pendency of their] marriage.”
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.