Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 135 Ariz. 199 - Steczo v. Steczo

Steczo v. Steczo’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
10
states following
May 2002
most recently cited

23 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1408

Relies on McCarty v. McCarty · Van Loan v. Van Loan · 6 Ariz. App. 362 - Rau v. Rau · In Re the Marriage of Furimsky

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

  1. “"(c)(1) Subject to the limitations of this section, a court may treat disposable retired or retainer pay payable to a member for pay periods beginning after June 25, 1981, either as property solely of the member or as property of the member and his spouse in accordance with the law of the jurisdiction of such court."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"Congress' intent in enacting subsection (c)(1) is discussed in the Senate Report on the new law. That report states: The purpose of this provision is to place the courts in the same position that they were in on June 26, 1981, the date of the McCarty decision, with respect to treatment of nondisability military retired or retainer pay. The provision is intended to remove the federal pre-emption found to exist by the United States Supreme Court and permit State and other courts of competent jurisdiction to apply pertinent State or other laws in determining whether military retired or retainer pay should be divisible. Nothing in this provision requires any division; it leaves that issue up to the courts applying community property, equitable distribution or other principles of marital property determination and distribution. This power is returned to the courts retroactive to June 26, 1981. This retroactive application will at least afford individuals who were divorced (or had decrees modified) during the interim period between June 26, 1981 and the effective date of this legislation the opportunity to return to the courts to take advantage of this provision. S.Rep. No. 502, 97th Cong., 2d Sess. 16 (1982), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 1982, 1555, 1611."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act”
    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.