Alaska Supreme Court· 12/24/1987
Dixon v. Dixon
Citations
- 747 P.2d 1169
- 1987 Alas. LEXIS 332
- 1987 WL 29824
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that superior court need not justify its decision to award or withhold prejudgment interest
- holding that superior court need not justify its decision to award or withhold prejudgment interest
- remanding case for specific findings because spouse’s “vague education plans” did not support trial court’s award of rehabilitative alimony
- remanding case for specific findings because spouse's \vague education plans\ did not support trial court's award of rehabilitative alimony
- remanding case for specific findings because spouse's \vague education plans\ did not support trial court's award of rehabilitative alimony
- policy inapplicable when marital assets fail to meet the needs of a divorcing spouse
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Rabinowitz, Burke, Matthews, Compton, Moore
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
32 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Lewis v. LewisAlaska Supreme Court· 1990-01-19· cited 62×
- Richmond v. RichmondAlaska Supreme Court· 1989-09-15· cited 60×
- Barnett v. BarnettAlaska Supreme Court· 2010-08-27· cited 52×
- Farrell v. FarrellAlaska Supreme Court· 1991-11-01· cited 44×
- Dodson v. DodsonAlaska Supreme Court· 1998-03-27· cited 42×
- Jones v. JonesAlaska Supreme Court· 1992-06-26· cited 37×
- Fortson v. FortsonAlaska Supreme Court· 2006-02-17· cited 37×
- Hanlon v. HanlonAlaska Supreme Court· 1994-03-25· cited 35×
- Rodriguez v. RodriguezAlaska Supreme Court· 1995-12-29· cited 34×
- McDaniel v. McDanielAlaska Supreme Court· 1992-04-03· cited 34×
- Day v. WilliamsAlaska Supreme Court· 2012-09-07· cited 28×
- Hockema v. HockemaAlaska Supreme Court· 2017-08-25· cited 26×
- MacKie v. ChizmarAlaska Supreme Court· 1998-10-02· cited 25×
- Brotherton v. BrothertonAlaska Supreme Court· 1997-07-18· cited 25×
- Heustess v. Kelley-HeustessAlaska Supreme Court· 2011-08-26· cited 25×
- Davila v. DavilaAlaska Supreme Court· 1994-07-01· cited 23×
- Dundas v. DundasAlaska Supreme Court· 2015-12-11· cited 23×
- Bays v. BaysAlaska Supreme Court· 1991-03-15· cited 20×
- Johnson v. JohnsonAlaska Supreme Court· 1992-07-17· cited 18×
- Ulsher v. UlsherAlaska Supreme Court· 1994-02-11· cited 17×
Cites
20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Merrill v. MerrillAlaska Supreme Court· 1962-02-06· cited 197×
- Carlson v. StateAlaska Supreme Court· 1979-08-24· cited 80×
- Schanck v. SchanckAlaska Supreme Court· 1986-06-26· cited 56×
- Bussell v. BussellAlaska Supreme Court· 1981-02-20· cited 53×
- Hunt v. HuntAlaska Supreme Court· 1985-04-19· cited 50×
- Native Village of Eyak v. GC ContractorsAlaska Supreme Court· 1983-01-14· cited 50×
- Farnsworth v. SteinerAlaska Supreme Court· 1981-12-24· cited 50×
- Williams v. BudkeMontana Supreme Court· 1980-02-08· cited 42×
- Miller v. MillerAlaska Supreme Court· 1987-06-26· cited 35×
- Brooks v. BrooksAlaska Supreme Court· 1984-01-27· cited 31×
- Malone v. MaloneAlaska Supreme Court· 1978-12-22· cited 30×
- Ovens v. OvensWashington Supreme Court· 1962-12-13· cited 28×
- Morris v. MorrisAlaska Supreme Court· 1986-09-12· cited 27×
- Messina v. MessinaAlaska Supreme Court· 1978-09-22· cited 25×
- Foster v. FosterAlaska Supreme Court· 1984-07-20· cited 23×
- Wuest v. WuestCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1945-12-07· cited 22×
- Martin v. MartinSupreme Court of Oklahoma· 1960-03-08· cited 10×
- In Re the Marriage of YatesCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1977-06-13· cited 10×
- Primrose v. PrimroseCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma· 1983-05-13· cited 10×
- In re the Dissolution of the Marriage of GriffinCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1978-06-13· cited 9×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.