Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 159 MONT 98 - Cook v. Cook

Cook v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
1
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably In Re the Marriage of Jorgensen (1979), Eschenburg v. Eschenburg (1976)

4 federal appellate · 39 state decisions

290197219801990200020102020decided

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 Emery v. Emery · Lewis v. Bowman · Libra v. Libra · Johnson v. Johnson · Hodgson v. Hodgson

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

  1. ““* * * the trial court may make an equitable division of the litigants’ property in a divorce action regardless of the state of title to that property and regardless of actual financial contribution. * * * ””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The district court apparently considered more in this case than mere financial contributions. The law has never confined ‘joint efforts’ to such a narrow meaning. The marital partnership is more than a business relation. The pecuniary and proprietary fruits of the marriage are frequently acquired by joint, effort, even though actual financial outlay may be more the-contribution of one spouse than the other. “This holding does not make Montana a community property state. There is no required percentage of allocation to be applied in all cases. Each case must be looked at by the trial court in- dividually with an eye to its unique circumstances. Under the circumstances here, we are not compelled to state that equal division of the property is an inequitable result.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The district court apparently considered more in this case than mere financial contributions. The law has never confined ‘joint efforts’ to such a narrow meaning. The marital partnership is more than a business relation. The pecuniary and proprietary fruits of the marriage are frequently acquired by joint effort, even though actual financial outlay may be more the contribution of one spouse than the other.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.