McCoy v. McCoy

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming trial court's finding of significant commingling as not clearly erroneous
• “The decision to apply Rose when there is no significant commingling of assets is a matter of discretion.”
• \The superior court's distribution will not be disturbed unless it is so clearly unjust as to constitute an abuse of discretion.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Nicholson v. Wolfe
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1999-03-26· cited 41×
• Cartee v. Cartee
  Alaska Supreme Court· 2010-09-24· cited 40×
• Heustess v. Kelley-Heustess
  Alaska Supreme Court· 2011-08-26· cited 25×
• Pfeil v. Lock
  Alaska Supreme Court· 2013-10-25· cited 9×
• Williams v. Wainscott
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1999-02-12· cited 3×

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Merrill v. Merrill
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1962-02-06· cited 197×
• Wanberg v. Wanberg
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1983-05-13· cited 139×
• Cox v. Cox
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1994-09-09· cited 105×
• Laing v. Laing
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1987-08-21· cited 77×
• Zimin v. Zimin
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1992-07-31· cited 55×
• Bussell v. Bussell
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1981-02-20· cited 53×
• Burgess v. Burgess
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1985-12-06· cited 44×
• Vanover v. Vanover
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1972-05-04· cited 37×
• McDaniel v. McDaniel
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1992-04-03· cited 34×
• Brooks v. Brooks
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1984-01-27· cited 31×
• Bell v. Bell
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1990-06-22· cited 29×
• Rose v. Rose
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1988-06-10· cited 25×
• Burcell v. Burcell
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1986-01-31· cited 24×