Stella v. Stella

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the wife was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on her rule 1.530 motion for new trial which alleged that the husband committed fraud by misrepresenting the value of certain art objects at trial
• if proven, wife’s assertions that husband had testified that a statue was worth $100, while knowing that its true value was $35,000, would have changed the court’s equitable distribution and, thus, entitled wife to an eviden-tiary hearing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Flemenbaum v. Flemenbaum
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1994-05-11· cited 42×
• Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. v. Welden
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1986-02-13· cited 16×
• Dynasty Express Corp. v. Weiss
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1996-06-19· cited 15×
• Crowley v. Crowley
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1996-08-07· cited 11×
• Kidder v. Hess
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1986-01-23· cited 6×
• Robinson v. Weiland
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-09-01· cited 6×
• Gostyla v. Gostyla
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1998-04-08· cited 4×
• Sanford v. Sanford
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1987-09-16· cited 3×
• HEIDKAMP v. Warren
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2007-10-12· cited 1×
• Landriscina v. Estates of Alpine Woods Ass'n
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1987-05-13
• Westberry v. Westberry
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1989-05-24