18 Neb. Ct. App. 75 - Fry v. Fry’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 414 (§ 1015 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1056 (§ 206 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Strunk v. Chromy-Strunk · Welch v. Welch · State v. Hausmann · Cumming v. Cumming · Bowers v. Lens
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] district court has the inherent power to determine the status of its judgments”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“simply an enforcement device of the decree of dissolution.”
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.