Jordan v. Jordan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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

1. “'the approval of the proposed QDRO is adjunct to the entry of the judgment of divorce and not an attempt to”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bridges v. Bridges · Douglas S. Johnston v. Lorrie Johnston

2. “[Rlegardless of whether the parties agree to a division [of a pension plan] or the court has to decree one, an order must be entered memorializing the division. Even assuming the valid entry of an appropriate order, that order cannot be enforced in the absence of action by the plan administrator. While it is up to a court to decide how a pension plan is equitably divided in a divorce, it is clear, beyond any doubt, that, under ERISA, it is up to the plan administrator to determine whether the proposed QDRO complies with the terms of ERISA.... Onee a plan administrator determines that a proposed QDRO meets the requirements of ERISA ..., the division decreed by the court, as memorialized in the now-approved QDRO, can be enforced ...; but, before the plan administrator finds and reports that the do- . mestic relations order is qualified, the division decreed by the court cannot be enforeed-regardless of what the court, the parties, or one of the parties, does or attempts to do....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Katherine Ryan v. Larry Janovsky

3. ““[T]he judgment of divorce ‘createfd]’ Wife’s right to receive benefits under Husband’s plan. See generally 29 U.S.C. § 1056 (d)(3)(B)(i)(I). The proposed QDRO simply ‘recognizes’ that right. See generally id. However, until the plan administrator approves Wife’s proposed QDRO, her right to receive benefits under Husband’s plan, even though set forth in a validly-entered judgment of divorce, is not enforceable under ERISA. For example, Wife cannot simply send DuPont a certified copy of her judgment of divorce and successfully demand payment of 42% of Husband’s benefits. This is because the judgment does not contain the ERISA-mandated information.” Jordan, 147 S.W.3d at 261 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 52 Kan. App. 2d 31 - In Re the Marriage of Larimore