Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 261 N.W.2d 606 - Bogen v. Bogen

Bogen v. Bogen’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

85
cited by 85 later decisions
1
states following
August 2000
most recently cited

85 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 85 later decisions — most recently August 2000 · most notably Marriage of Rutten v. Rutten (1984), Marriage of Taylor v. Taylor (1983)

85 state decisions

7601977198019902000decided

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 Sherrer v. Sherrer · Bollenbach v. Bollenbach · Peterson v. Peterson · Peterson v. Peterson · Borchert v. Borchert

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

  1. “The court, having due regard to all the circumstances and the custody of children of the parties, may award to either party the right of occupancy of the homestead of the parties, exclusive of otherwise, upon a final decree of dissolution or legal separation or proper modification of it, for a period of time determined by the court. An award of the right of occupancy of the homestead, whether exclusive or otherwise, may be in addition to the maximum amounts awarded under sections 518.-58, 518.61 and 518.611.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[T]he length of the marriage, any prior marriage of a party, the age, health, station, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate, liabilities, needs, opportunity for future acquisition of capital assets, and income of each party. The court shall also consider the contribution of each in the acquisition, preservation, depreciation or appreciation in the amount or value of the marital property, as well as the contribution of a spouse as a homemaker. It shall be conclusively presumed that each spouse made a substantial contribution to the acquisition of income and property while they were living together as husband and wife. The court may also award to either spouse the household goods and furniture of the parties, whether or not acquired during the marriage.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““It is to be noted that Minn.St. 517.03 does not expressly declare a marriage in violation of its provisions void, as does § 518.01 relating to certain other prohibited marriages.””
    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.