Holley v. Holley

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that check satisfied conspicuous statement 10 requirement where it said “Paid in Full plus int. & late ch.” in the memorandum section
• finding accord and satisfaction where evidence reflected parties’ clear intent to compromise husband’s alimony obligation.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Kornfield v. Kornfield
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 2000-04-07· cited 11×
• Kripp v. Kripp
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2001-09-14· cited 7×
• Keeler v. Keeler
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1998-05-04· cited 2×
• UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY v. RIVERO DIAGNOSTIC CENTER, INC., A/A/O CARLOS BACALLAO
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2021-08-25

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Wilson v. Bogert
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1959-12-08· cited 51×
• Fairchild v. Mathews
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1966-06-07· cited 43×
• Eder v. Yvette B. Gervey Interiors, Inc.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1981-12-15· cited 30×
• Bumgarner v. Bumgarner
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1993-10-04· cited 29×
• World Wide Lease, Inc. v. Woodworth
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1986-09-26· cited 29×
• Perkins v. Highland Enterprises, Inc.
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1991-08-22· cited 16×
• W. F. Construction Co. v. Kalik
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1982-10-12· cited 13×
• Nordling v. WHELCHEL MINES COMPANY
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1965-12-28· cited 10×
• Hilt v. Draper
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1992-08-19· cited 10×
• Burke Co. v. Hilton Development Co.
  N.D. Florida· 1992-09-30· cited 10×
• Knoke v. Charlebois
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1984-10-23· cited 7×
• Lincoln National Life Insurance v. Prodromidis
  D. Massachusetts· 1994-08-15· cited 5×