Johnson v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1408 · 29 U.S.C. § 1056 (§ 206 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Mansell v. Mansell · State v. Bishop · State v. Thomas · Berry by and Through Berry v. Beech Aircraft · 92 Ill. App. 3d 1087 - Williamson v. Opsahl
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.
“We review the trial court's legal conclusions for correctness and its factual findings for clear error.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“acerue[ ] in whole or in part during the marriage.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A [district] court has considerable discretion considering property [division] in a divorce proceeding, thus its actions enjoy a presumption of validity. We will disturb the [district] court's division only if there is a misunderstanding or misapplication of the law ... indicating an abuse of discretion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Johnson v. Johnson
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.