Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 4/30/2003
In re Watterworth
Citations
- 149 N.H. 442
- 821 A.2d 1107
- 2003 N.H. LEXIS 62
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating trial court may not award child support in guise of alimony
- “The Hodgins formula is designed to help trial courts avoid the problem of valuation when the value of the pension is, by its 2 nature, impossible to determine at the time of divorce.” (quotations omitted and emphasis added)
- present and contingent pension values ascertainable
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Brock, Broderick, Dalianis, Duggan, Nadeau
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- In Re SaleskySupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2008-10-08· cited 109×
- In Re HampersSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2006-11-01· cited 79×
- Carignan v. New Hampshire International Speedway, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2004-09-09· cited 55×
- May v. MayWest Virginia Supreme Court· 2003-12-04· cited 47×
- In re DonovanSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2005-04-01· cited 36×
- In Re CostaSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2007-10-18· cited 35×
- In Re SarvelaSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2006-11-29· cited 34×
- In re ArabianSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2004-06-11· cited 34×
- In re HeinrichSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2012-11-09· cited 31×
- In re HenrySupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2012-01-13· cited 26×
- DeLucca v. DeLuccaSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2005-04-08· cited 22×
- In re R.A.Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2005-12-30· cited 20×
- Seivert v. AlliNebraska Supreme Court· 2021-05-21· cited 16×
- In Re RupaSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2010-12-22· cited 14×
- State v. KidderSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2004-02-27· cited 12×
- In RE TABER-McCARTHYSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2010-04-09· cited 7×
- State v. L'HeureuxSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2004-04-23· cited 7×
- State v. ClarkSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2004-05-14· cited 7×
- In re CottrellSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2012-06-29· cited 6×
- Henderson Holdings at Sugar Hill, LLC v. Town of Sugar HillSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2012-07-31· cited 5×
Cites
22 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- In Re the Marriage of HallWashington Supreme Court· 1984-12-13· cited 121×
- Amodio v. AmodioNew York Court of Appeals· 1987-06-04· cited 97×
- In Re the Marriage of HuffSupreme Court of Colorado· 1992-08-24· cited 50×
- In re LetendreSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2002-12-31· cited 49×
- Hodgins v. HodginsSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1985-07-01· cited 41×
- Butler v. ButlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1995-07-24· cited 39×
- In re CroweSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2002-08-19· cited 36×
- In Re Marriage of DeCosseMontana Supreme Court· 1997-04-15· cited 34×
- McCabe v. McCabeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1990-05-10· cited 30×
- Hillebrand v. HillebrandSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1988-06-06· cited 29×
- Rattee v. RatteeSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2001-02-15· cited 29×
- Theilen v. TheilenMissouri Court of Appeals· 1992-11-24· cited 25×
- Dombrowski v. DombrowskiSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1989-06-02· cited 17×
- Rothbart v. RothbartSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1996-05-29· cited 17×
- In re GordonSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2002-05-10· cited 16×
- Drake v. DrakeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1991-01-25· cited 14×
- Hoffman v. HoffmanSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1999-04-21· cited 13×
- Herman v. Monadnock PR-24 Training Council, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2002-06-07· cited 13×
- In re ValenceSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2002-05-07· cited 12×
- In re CoderreSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2002-09-30· cited 12×
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.