Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2000 ND 20 - Pearson v. Pearson

Pearson v. Pearson’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

1 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 2025

1 district · 10 state decisions

80200020102020decided

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 Cermak v. Cermak · Roen v. Roen · Brissett v. Sykes · Foreng v. Foreng · Lucy v. Lucy

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

  1. “The proponent of the common law marriage bears the burden of establishing its validity under the law of the foreign jurisdiction.”
    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.