Mitchim v. Mitchim’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 2002
5 state decisions
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 International Shoe Co. v. Washington · McGee v. International Life Insurance · O’Callahan v. Parker, Warden · Hess v. Pawloski · May v. Anderson
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.
“The ‘inception-of-title’ rule is applied to determine the [ejxistence of a community-property interest in retirement benefits. The logic of the ‘inception-of-title’ rule, however, has not been pushed to a rigorous conclusion in determining the [e]xtent of the community interest. A number of the cases hold that the separate or community character of retirement benefits is to be determined by the status of the spouse at the time the benefit was earned. For example, if some of the benefits were earned while the employee spouse was unmarried, then that party is apportioned to him as his separate property.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McClary v. Thompson
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.