Massachusetts Appeals Court· 8/18/2009
Wooters v. Wooters
Citations
- 74 Mass. App. Ct. 839
- 911 N.E.2d 234
- 2009 Mass. App. LEXIS 1081
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- explaining complexity of properly characterizing “stock options,” and concluding that exercised stock options were part of payor’s “gross annual employment income” under alimony provision
- finding husband in violation but not in contempt of alimony order where order not clear and unequivocal, and husband had good faith belief of compliance
- upholding contractual obligation in alimony action but rejecting finding of contempt
- husband was properly ordered to make further payments from proceeds of stock options, but should not have been held in contempt
- husband not guilty of contempt where his failure to pay alimony obligation in full was result of good faith dispute over amount owed
- \the husband's disagreement [with how to interpret divorce judgment] or misunderstanding of the issue [did] not constitute clear and undoubted disobedience of a clear and unequivocal command\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Katzmann
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Hoegen v. HoegenMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2016-01-22· cited 39×
- Hassey v. HasseyMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2014-06-25· cited 28×
- Smith v. SmithMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2018-06-07· cited 26×
- LISA M. JONES v. ANDREW D. JONES (and a consolidated case ).Massachusetts Appeals Court· 2022-09-14· cited 20×
- Crater v. OliverDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2019-02-14· cited 14×
- Halpern v. RabbMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2009-09-30· cited 12×
- Cooper v. KetoMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2013-06-26· cited 10×
- GERALDINE GRIFFIN v. HARRY MICHAEL KAY.Massachusetts Appeals Court· 2022-06-15· cited 3×
- PHILIP M. KING v. ANTONIETTA CERBONE.Massachusetts Appeals Court· 2022-10-04· cited 2×
- Ludwig v. Lamee-LudwigMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2017-02-07
- Leon v. CormierMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2017-03-24
- Voorhis v. RelleMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2020-02-10
- Burns v. BurnsLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2012-06-20
- Franchi v. FranchiMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2019-01-30
- Leeden v. DoellMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2019-04-22
Cites
13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Baccanti v. MortonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2001-08-13· cited 68×
- In Re Marriage of Robinson and ThielCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2001-11-20· cited 55×
- In Re the Marriage of KerrCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1999-12-23· cited 47×
- In Re Marriage of Colangelo and SebelaAppellate Court of Illinois· 2005-01-18· cited 31×
- Mahoney v. MahoneyMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2006-02-15· cited 15×
- Braun v. BraunMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2007-05-04· cited 15×
- Hiett v. HiettCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2004-04-14· cited 14×
- In re DolanSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2001-11-21· cited 14×
- Geoghegan v. GeogheganDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2007-11-16· cited 13×
- Stabile v. StabileMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2002-09-06· cited 11×
- Seither v. SeitherDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-12-15· cited 9×
- Wooters v. WootersMassachusetts Appeals Court· 1997-04-03· cited 9×
- Kraft v. Police CommissionerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1994-03-10· cited 8×
Other cases named Wooters v. Wooters
1 other CourtListener record shares this case 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.