Jeffcoat v. Jeffcoat’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
2 district · 39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably 147 Md. App. 350 - Turner v. Turner (2002), 112 Md. App. 197 - Beck v. Beck (1996)
2 district · 39 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 58 Md. App. 308 - Holston v. Holston · 68 Ill. App. 3d 513 - Klingberg v. Klingberg · Schweizer v. Schweizer · 58 Md. App. 386 - Sharp v. Sharp · BD. OF EXAMINERS IN OPTOMETRY v. Spitz
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“That party retains throughout the burden of persuading the court that funds have been dissipated, but after that party establishes a prima facie case that monies have been dissipated, i.e. expended for the principal purpose of reducing the funds available for equitable distribution, the burden shifts to the party who spent the money to produce evidence sufficient to show that the expenditures were appropriate.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“[WJhere a chancellor finds that property was intentionally dissipated in order to avoid inclusion of that property towards consideration of a monetary award, such intentional dissipation is no more than a fraud on marital right s, and the chancellor should consider the dissipated property as extant marital property ... to be valued with the other existing marital property. This principle would apply even where the dissipated property cannot be recovered because it is in the hands of a purchaser who took in good faith, without notice and for value.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““[WJhere a chancellor finds that property was intentionally dissipated in order to avoid inclusion of that property towards a consideration of a monetary award, such intentional dissipation is no more than a fraud on marital rights, and the chancellor should consider the dissipated property as extant marital property ... to be valued with other existing property.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.