Skip to main content

Citations

  • 973 So. 2d 580
  • 2008 WL 80224

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding bankruptcy nondischargeability provision was error that must be stricken from the judgment; a state court cannot decide a federal bankruptcy issue in a divorce case when no bankruptcy proceeding has been filed
  • stating there “must be evidence of spending spouse’s intentional dissipation or destruction of the asset”
  • stating there “must be evidence of spending spouse’s intentional dissipation or destruction of the asset”
  • striking judgment’s provision concerning nondischargeability of periodic payment award while husband’s bankruptcy petition was pending
  • “As a general proposition, it is error to include assets in an equitable distribution scheme that have been diminished or dissipated during the dissolution proceedings.”
  • “The misconduct necessary to. support inclusion of dissipated assets in an equitable distribution scheme does not include mismanagement or simple squandering of marital assets in a manner of which the other spouse ■ disapproves.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stringer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

51 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

31 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

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.