Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 105 N.M. 263 - Dorbin v. Dorbin

Dorbin v. Dorbin’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
2
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently November 2024

24 state decisions

14019861990200020102020decided

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 Pereira v. Pereira · 64 Cal. 2d 778 - See v. See · 28 Cal. 3d 366 - In Re Marriage of Moore · 130 Cal. App. 3d 426 - In Re Marriage of Marsden · Hertz v. Hertz

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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “1) The value of the separate asset or the separate portion of an asset at the date of marriage is determined. 2) That pre-marriage value is treated as though it had been a well-secured, long-term investment and such interest as a well-secured, long-term investment would have earned is added to the separate premarriage value. The total is the separate property interest. 3) The fair market value of the asset is determined as of the date of divorce. 4) The fair market value of the asset as of the date of divorce is apportioned with the separate property owner taking an interest equal to the value found at step 2 while the community receives the balance of the fair market value.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[Hjusbands and wives have a mutual duty to support one another, including the use of separate funds where necessary or appropriate. It is sound policy to allow apportionment of an existing asset acquired with mixed monies (community and separate monies) and to deny reimbursement of monies spent, but not to acquire an asset. To do otherwise would be to invite litigation for accountings between spouses to determine who paid for the least significant thing.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[A]pportionment is a legal concept that is properly applied to an asset acquired by married people with mixed monies-that is, partly with community and partly with separate funds.”
    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.