882 So. 2d 418 - Davidson v. Davidson’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 382 So. 2d 1197 - Canakaris v. Canakaris · 819 So. 2d 834 - Cozier v. Cozier · 861 So. 2d 1218 - Solomon v. Solomon · 553 So. 2d 340 - Hanks v. Hanks · 745 So. 2d 549 - Moorehead v. Moorehead
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A retirement pension is considered a marital asset for purposes of equitable distribution. See Blaine v. Blaine, 872 So.2d 383 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). On the other hand, a disability pension "by its very nature replaces future lost income, and thus is not a marital asset subject to equitable distribution." Hoffner v. Hoffner, 577 So.2d 703, 704 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); see also Hanks v. Hanks, 553 So.2d 340, 343 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989).”
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.