Massachusetts Appeals Court· 5/30/1974
Mead v. Mead
Citations
- 311 N.E.2d 585
- 2 Mass. App. Ct. 338
- 1974 Mass. App. LEXIS 643
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- where husband’s financial position had improved since entry of decree, downward modification unwarranted
- modification unwarranted where husband’s earning capacity and resources not shown to have diminished
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Hale, Keville, Armstrong
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
10 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Pemberton v. PembertonMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1980-01-03· cited 37×
- Fried v. FriedMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1977-11-02· cited 29×
- Binder v. BinderMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1979-06-15· cited 21×
- Kelley v. KelleyMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2005-10-11· cited 17×
- Kennedy v. KennedyMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1983-12-27· cited 16×
- Hano v. HanoMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1977-10-14· cited 10×
- Fugere v. FugereMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1987-09-30· cited 9×
- Dawson v. RogersMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1979-04-09· cited 6×
- Melisi v. MelisiMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1981-05-06· cited 1×
- Blieden v. BliedenMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1982-07-30· cited 1×
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.