Supreme Court of Connecticut· 4/8/2008
Gershman v. Gershman
Citations
- 943 A.2d 1091
- 286 Conn. 341
- 2008 Conn. LEXIS 103
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that dissipation “at a minimum . . . requires financial misconduct involving marital assets, such as intentional waste or a selfish financial impropriety, coupled with a purpose unrelated to the marriage”
- because financial orders in dissolution action are carefully crafted mosaic with interwoven components, disturbance of particular order on appeal often requires remand for reconsideration of all orders
- because financial orders in dissolution action are carefully crafted mosaic with interwoven components, disturbance of particular order on appeal often requires remand for reconsideration of all orders
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Rogers, Norcott, Vertefeuille, Zarella, Schaller
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Crews v. CrewsSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2010-03-16· cited 55×
- O'Brien v. O'BrienSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2017-06-27· cited 37×
- Kaczynski v. KaczynskiSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-11-10· cited 35×
- O'Brien v. O'BrienConnecticut Appellate Court· 2012-10-16· cited 16×
- Felis v. FelisSupreme Court of Vermont· 2013-05-24· cited 9×
- Shaulson v. ShaulsonConnecticut Appellate Court· 2010-12-28· cited 7×
- Ferri v. Powell-FerriConnecticut Appellate Court· 2020-09-15· cited 5×
- Ferri v. Powell-FerriSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2015-06-16
- O'Brien v. O'BrienConnecticut Appellate Court· 2015-12-01
- Fronsaglia v. FronsagliaConnecticut Appellate Court· 2021-02-23
- K. S. v. R. S.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2024-11-13
Cites
26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- In Re Marriage of Fennelly & BreckenfelderSupreme Court of Iowa· 2007-07-20· cited 241×
- Almgren v. Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical CenterIllinois Supreme Court· 1994-11-15· cited 188×
- Krafick v. KrafickSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1995-08-08· cited 162×
- Harris v. HarrisNebraska Supreme Court· 2001-01-19· cited 133×
- Grimm v. GrimmSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2005-12-13· cited 106×
- Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1999-06-15· cited 94×
- Greco v. GrecoSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2005-09-06· cited 71×
- Sharp v. SharpCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1984-04-09· cited 56×
- Hoverson v. HoversonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2001-07-10· cited 55×
- Ramin v. RaminSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2007-02-20· cited 55×
- In Re Marriage of CharlesAppellate Court of Illinois· 1996-10-24· cited 43×
- In Re Marriage of OsbornAppellate Court of Illinois· 1990-12-14· cited 39×
- In Re Marriage of IsaacsAppellate Court of Illinois· 1994-03-30· cited 30×
- McDavid v. McDavidSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1999-01-18· cited 27×
- Reynolds v. ReynoldsMissouri Court of Appeals· 2003-07-15· cited 27×
- Weinstein v. WeinsteinSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2007-01-02· cited 25×
- Wilner v. WilnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1993-04-05· cited 25×
- Maczek v. MaczekAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1998-03-12· cited 24×
- Hollander v. HollanderCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1991-11-01· cited 18×
- Petties v. PettiesMissouri Court of Appeals· 2004-03-30· cited 17×
Other cases named Gershman v. Gershman
2 other CourtListener records share this case name.
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.