Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 710 So. 2d 713 - McCarty v. McCarty

710 So. 2d 713 - McCarty v. McCarty’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
December 2012
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently December 2012

12 state decisions

80199820002010decided

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 Kennedy v. Kennedy · 634 So. 2d 782 - Woodard v. Woodard · 641 So. 2d 408 - Kennedy v. Kennedy · 692 So. 2d 283 - Dal Ponte v. Dal Ponte · 678 So. 2d 1368 - Brooks v. Brooks

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

  1. “The obligation to make findings may well be viewed as burdensome by some trial judges. Nevertheless, such a requirement serves the laudatory goals of avoiding arbitrary outcomes and facilitating efficient appellate review. Findings of fact are also required in cases of equitable distribution of marital assets under section 61.075, Florida Statutes (1997). Of note, the equitable distribution statute recognizes that such findings are necessary not only to facilitate review, but also "to advise the parties . . . of the trial court's rationale. . . ." § 61.075(3)(d), Fla. Stat. (1997).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “include findings of fact relative to the factors enumerated in subsection (2) supporting an award or denial of alimony.”
    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.