Nebraska Supreme Court· 5/16/1986
Taylor v. Taylor
Citations
- 386 N.W.2d 851
- 222 Neb. 721
- 1986 Neb. LEXIS 962
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- defining enterprise goodwill as including “recurrent customer patronage” and noting “many commercial enterprises” possess this type of goodwill
- describing personal goodwill as “nothing more than probable future earning capacity”
- “we do not reject in all cases capitalization of excess earnings as a method to determine earning capacity”
- recognizes good will but denies it for this sole medical practitioner
- nature of property division is discretionary with the trial court
- nature of property division is discretionary with the trial court
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Krivosha, Boslaugh, White, Hastings, Caporale, Shanahan, Grant
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
60 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Kelly v. KellyNebraska Supreme Court· 1994-05-27· cited 120×
- Detter v. Miracle Hills Animal Hosp., PCNebraska Supreme Court· 2005-01-21· cited 105×
- Hanson v. HansonSupreme Court of Missouri· 1987-10-13· cited 76×
- Wilson v. WilsonSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1987-12-21· cited 75×
- Eslami v. EslamiSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1991-05-21· cited 73×
- Pendleton v. PendletonNebraska Supreme Court· 1993-03-05· cited 71×
- Black v. BlackNebraska Supreme Court· 1986-06-20· cited 62×
- Richmond v. RichmondAlaska Supreme Court· 1989-09-15· cited 60×
- Clark v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1990-01-05· cited 60×
- Ritter v. RitterNebraska Supreme Court· 1990-01-12· cited 56×
- May v. MayWest Virginia Supreme Court· 2003-12-04· cited 47×
- Preston v. PrestonNebraska Supreme Court· 1992-07-31· cited 47×
- Thompson v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Florida· 1991-01-10· cited 45×
- Kricsfeld v. KricsfeldNebraska Court of Appeals· 1999-01-05· cited 41×
- Prahinski v. PrahinskiCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1988-09-02· cited 40×
- Endres v. EndresSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1995-05-17· cited 33×
- Gilman v. HohmanIndiana Court of Appeals· 2000-03-09· cited 31×
- Von Tersch v. Von TerschNebraska Supreme Court· 1990-05-04· cited 30×
- Brandt v. BrandtNebraska Supreme Court· 1988-01-08· cited 30×
- Sorensen v. SorensenCourt of Appeals of Utah· 1989-02-10· cited 23×
Cites
25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- In Re Marriage of NicholsColorado Court of Appeals· 1980-03-03· cited 364×
- Holbrook v. HolbrookCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin· 1981-06-04· cited 131×
- Dugan v. DuganSupreme Court of New Jersey· 1983-02-28· cited 114×
- Guggenmos v. GuggenmosNebraska Supreme Court· 1984-12-07· cited 105×
- Nail v. NailTexas Supreme Court· 1972-11-08· cited 101×
- In Re Marriage of FosterCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1974-10-22· cited 70×
- In Re the Marriage of FleegeWashington Supreme Court· 1979-01-04· cited 67×
- Powell v. PowellSupreme Court of Kansas· 1982-06-11· cited 65×
- In Re Marriage of WhiteAppellate Court of Illinois· 1981-07-29· cited 41×
- Gleason v. GleasonNebraska Supreme Court· 1984-11-09· cited 24×
- Pyke v. PykeNebraska Supreme Court· 1982-07-09· cited 23×
- In Re Marriage of FentonCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1982-07-30· cited 20×
- Levy v. LevyNew Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1978-12-06· cited 17×
- Koubek v. KoubekNebraska Supreme Court· 1982-06-25· cited 16×
- Rockwood v. RockwoodNebraska Supreme Court· 1985-01-04· cited 12×
- Buker v. BukerNebraska Supreme Court· 1980-02-20· cited 11×
- Choat v. ChoatNebraska Supreme Court· 1984-12-28· cited 10×
- Burger v. BurgerNebraska Supreme Court· 1983-11-18· cited 9×
- Martin v. MartinNebraska Supreme Court· 1983-11-04· cited 9×
- Andersen v. AndersenNebraska Supreme Court· 1979-11-27· cited 9×
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.