Meeks v. Meeks

How courts have described this case

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

• “We conclude that the trial court did not have the authority to make any binding legal ruling concerning the dis-chargeability of these debts in any future bankruptcy proceeding that might be filed.... ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Roth v. Roth
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2008-01-09· cited 58×
• Pipitone v. Pipitone
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2009-08-28· cited 13×
• Hood v. Hood
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2010-07-30· cited 1×
• Stewmon v. Stewmon
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-05-25
• Guerra v. Guerra
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2016-09-28
• FRANK E. POLO v. MERLIN HERNANDEZ
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2023-08-30

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Thompson v. Thompson
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2004-07-15· cited 139×
• Gazil v. Gazil
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1977-01-27· cited 20×
• McNierney v. McNierney (In Re McNierney)
  S.D. Florida· 1989-02-03· cited 10×
• Fortner v. Fortner
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1994-01-28· cited 9×
• Keidaish v. Smith
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1981-06-03· cited 8×
• De Lapouyade v. De Lapouyade
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1998-04-29· cited 6×
• Huey v. Huey
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1994-09-28· cited 5×