Massachusetts Appeals Court· 7/28/1986
Pavluvcik v. Sullivan
Citations
- 495 N.E.2d 869
- 22 Mass. App. Ct. 581
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- upholding separation agreement after party's death that required partition of tenancy by the entirety, reasoning that agreement was comprehensive and final settlement taking effect as of date of order approving it
- parties intended settlement agreement, which was comprehensive and final settlement of their financial relationship, to be enforceable as of date of order approving it
- “In the absence of an express provision stating otherwise, a separation agreement is usually held to survive a subsequent divorce judgment incorporating its provisions.”
- parties intended settlement agreement, which was comprehensive and final settlement of their financial relationship, to be enforceable as of date of order approving it
- death of spouse before entry of final divorce judgment will leave intact right of survivorship in jointly held property unless parties take some action to alter result
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Smith, Warner, Fine
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- DeCristofaro v. DeCristofaroMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1987-05-27· cited 37×
- Parrish v. ParrishMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1991-02-05· cited 30×
- Timberlake v. HeflinWest Virginia Supreme Court· 1989-03-13· cited 19×
- Kotler v. SpauldingMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1987-07-22· cited 19×
- Jones v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama· 1987-11-25· cited 18×
- United States v. MurrayFirst Circuit· 2000-07-07· cited 15×
- Estate of Ladd v. Estate of LaddSupreme Court of Vermont· 1994-01-14· cited 11×
- Waxman v. WaxmanMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2013-09-30· cited 11×
- Ex Parte AdamsSupreme Court of Alabama· 1998-04-24· cited 10×
- Harris v. HarrisMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1986-12-09· cited 7×
- Cappello v. CappelloMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1986-12-18· cited 6×
- Calhoun v. RawlinsMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2018-06-27· cited 4×
- In re the Estate of PaveseNew York Surrogate's Court· 2002-05-30· cited 4×
- United States v. MurrayD. Massachusetts· 1999-05-07· cited 1×
- JANE K. FURNAS v. CATHLEEN M. CIRONE, personal representative.Massachusetts Appeals Court· 2023-01-09
Cites
21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Knox v. RemickMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1976-12-08· cited 102×
- Ross v. RossMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1982-01-11· cited 74×
- Gottsegen v. GottsegenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1986-05-22· cited 58×
- Surabian v. SurabianMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1972-07-18· cited 58×
- Stansel v. StanselMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1982-03-05· cited 47×
- In Re Estate of NelsonWashington Supreme Court· 1975-07-03· cited 43×
- Campagna v. CampagnaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1958-05-21· cited 39×
- Taylor v. GowetzMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1959-05-29· cited 36×
- DuMont v. GodbeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1981-01-06· cited 32×
- Moore v. MooreMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1983-04-29· cited 32×
- Roberts v. RobertsMississippi Supreme Court· 1980-03-12· cited 29×
- Diggs v. DiggsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1935-06-27· cited 27×
- Fitzgerald v. TrueworthySupreme Judicial Court of Maine· 1984-05-30· cited 12×
- Ratchford v. RatchfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1986-03-13· cited 10×
- Randall v. RandallMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1983-10-27· cited 9×
- Rucks v. TaylorSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1984-04-09· cited 9×
- Bassett v. First National Bank & Trust Co.Nebraska Supreme Court· 1972-11-10· cited 8×
- Pine v. PineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1948-12-28· cited 5×
- Snow v. MathewsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1966-09-21· cited 5×
- Daywalt v. BertrandCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1972-08-25· cited 4×
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.