Mariche v. Mariche’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Prior to 1975, 42 U.S.C. § 407 (1970) provided that social security payments of all types were not transferable or assignable or subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal process: `The right of any person to any future payment under this subchapter shall not be transferable or assignable, at law or in equity, and none of the moneys paid or payable or rights existing under this subchapter shall be subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal process, or to the operation of any bankruptcy or insolvency law.' "Aware of the importance of the right of a spouse and children to receive support from an absent parent, Congress in 1975 enacted § 459 of the Social Security Act ( 42 U.S.C. § 659 [1982] ), which waived the sovereign immunity previously enjoyed by the United States and specified that wages of government employees and also social security benefits are subject to garnishment in child support and alimony cases. A 1983 amendment to 42 U.S.C. § 407 included a provision that no other law enacted before, on, or after a certain date could be construed to limit, supersede, or otherwise modify the provisions of § 407 except to the extent it does so by express reference to that section. 42 U.S.C. § 407 (Supp. III 1985). Currently, 42 U.S.C. § 659 (Supp. III 1985) provides: `Notwithstanding any other provision of law, (including section 407 of this title) effective January 1, 1975, moneys (the entitlement to which is based upon remuner”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. E.W. Ex Rel. J.R.W. v. Hall · 16 Kan. App. 2d 668 - In Re the Marriage of Sedbrook

2. “Notwithstanding any other provision of law (including section 407 of this title) effective January 1, 1975, moneys (the entitlement to which is based upon remuneration for employment) due from, or payable by, the United States or the District of Columbia (including any agency, subdivision, or instrumentality thereof) to any individual, including members of the armed services, shall be subject, in like manner and to the same extent as if the United States or the District of Columbia were a private person, to legal process brought for the enforcement, against such individual of his legal obligations to provide child support or make alimony payments (emphasis supplied).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Tennessee Department of Human Services Ex Rel. Young v. Young

3. ““The ‘true purpose and policy’ of the exemption law at issue here is also clear. K.S.A. 1987 Supp. 60-2308 is designed to protect the funds necessary to support a pensioner and his family. This conclusion is supported by the wording of the statute itself ‘that such pension money is necessary for the maintenance of the debtor’s support or a family support.’ ” 243 Kan. at 551 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 13 Kan. App. 2d 536 - In Re the Marriage of Schoneman