Cody v. Riecker’s Empirical Analysis
594 F.2d 314 · 1979
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2015 · most notably Ridgway v. Ridgway (1981), 78 Ill. App. 3d 653 - In Re Marriage of Hunt (1979)
13 federal appellate · 1 district · 16 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo · American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Merry · 454 F. Supp. 22 - Cody v. Riecker · Zwingmann v. Zwingmann
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In this case, Congress has granted a separate spouse’s benefit, and has terminated that benefit upon absolute divorce. Different considerations might well apply where Congress has remained silent on the subject of benefits for spouses, particularly when the pension program is a private one which federal law merely regulates. See Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 88 Stat 829, 29 U.S.C. §1001 et seq. [29 USCS §§1001 et seq.] Our holding intimates no view concerning the application of community property principles to benefits payable under programs that possess these distinctive characteristics.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““We reject appellant’s proffered statutory construction and believe the more reasonable interpretation to be that a garnishment order used to satisfy court ordered family support payments is impliedly excepted from preempted state law relating ‘to any employee benefits plan’_[at 121].””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Edwards v. Edwards“(e)ach pension plan shall provide that benefits provided under the plan may not be assigned or alienated.”
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.