Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 348 N.J. Super. 442 - Menake v. Menake

348 N.J. Super. 442 - Menake v. Menake’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
September 2014
most recently cited

15 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (§ 2 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 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 Painter v. Painter · 177 N.J. Super. 471 - Kikkert v. Kikkert · Majauskas v. Majauskas · Kikkert v. Kikkert · Moore v. Moore

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

  1. “the pension benefit is valued as of the [assumed] date of retirement and then discounted to determine present value.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Can, for instance, such enhancement be mathematically determined and factored out? Perhaps more importantly, can it be shown that the post-divorce enhancing factors i.e., here, the alleged extraordinary overtime, are entirely unrelated to plaintiff's prior years of service? If, for instance, seniority were a dispositive factor in his ability to obtain the overtime, it would seem that would be future enhancement of the marital efforts for which it could be said both spouses looked forward to. If only partially a factor, can the post-divorce service efforts be mathematically extracted? [ Ibid. ]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “As we observed in Risoldi v. Risoldi, 320 N.J.Super. 524, 544 , 727 A. 2d 1038 (App. Div.), [ certif. denied, 161 N.J. 335 , 736 A. 2d 528 (1999) ] `[a]pplication of the coverture fraction, applied at the time the benefits convert to pay status at retirement, will assure [that the employee spouse] maintains the fruits of his post-divorce labor.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.