Mills v. Johnson

How courts have described this case

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

• questioning the decision to base an alimony award “primarily on the fact that there is a disparity in the parties’ income,” noting that “[a] trial court in a divorce proceeding is not required 6 to equalize the financial position of the parties” (alteration in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• ANTONIO SORIA v. LUCINDA SORIA
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2018-02-07· cited 4×
• DANIELA SOUTO COE v. REINIER NICOLAAS RAUTENBERG
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2023-02-15
• Lindsay Wallace v. Andrew Wallace
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2025-07-23

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Canakaris v. Canakaris
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1980-03-27· cited 2,288×
• Kearley v. Kearley
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-09-08· cited 16×
• Hotaling v. Hotaling
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2007-08-17· cited 14×
• Schumaker v. Schumaker
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-06-23· cited 10×
• Todd v. Guillaume-Todd
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2008-01-02· cited 10×
• Carls v. Carls
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-12-03· cited 10×
• Torres v. Torres
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-09-28· cited 6×
• McCann v. CRUMBLISH-McCANN
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2009-11-13· cited 4×
• Blackburn v. Blackburn
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-11-30· cited 2×
• Payne v. Payne
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-05-23· cited 2×
• Crittenden v. Davis
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-06-13· cited 1×