Still v. Still

How courts have described this case

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

• interpreting specific language in an agreement providing father’s tuition obligation “shall continue as long as the child remains continuously enrolled” to mean that the father was not obligated to resume payments after the child was no longer continuously enrolled
• interpreting specific language in an agreement providing father’s tuition obligation “shall continue as long as the child remains continuously enrolled” to mean that the father was not obligated to resume payments after the child was no longer continuously enrolled

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Mims v. Mims
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2015-05-11· cited 8×
• Mattocks v. Matus
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1996-02-12· cited 8×
• Richardson v. Levitt
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2002-09-16· cited 3×

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Coleman v. Coleman
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1977-12-05· cited 40×
• Eaddy v. Thomas
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1989-01-24· cited 1×