Cameron v. Cameron’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 120 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 129 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably Vallone v. Vallone (1982), Segrest v. Segrest (1983)
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 120 state decisions — followed in 12 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
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1408
Relies on City of New Orleans v. Dukes · Reed v. Reed · McCarty v. McCarty · Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo · Maynard v. Hill
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 129 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Subject to the limitations of this section, a court may treat disposable retired or retainer pay payable to a member for pay periods beginning after June 25, 1981, either as property solely of the member or as property of the member and his spouse in accordance with the law of the jurisdiction of such court.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Cook v. Cameron · Neese v. Neese“[T]he Act (USFSPA) limits such division of retirement pay to periods beginning after June 25, 1981. ****** [T]he divorce decree, dated March 29, 1979, awards Sue Cameron ‘thirty-five percent (35%) of the gross present and future Military Retirement presently being received.’ Sue Cameron is entitled to recover that thirty-five percent, but not for the period from March 29, 1979 to June 25, 1981. Therefore, we affirm that part of the trial court judgment awarding Sue Cameron thirty-five percent of the military retirement pay, but only for the period beginning after June 25, 1981. (Emphasis added). 641 S.W.2d at 213 .”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Cook v. Cameron · Adams v. Adams“[W]e hold that the property spouses acquire during marriage, except by gift, devise or descent should be divided upon divorce in Texas in the same manner as community property, irrespective of the domicile of the spouses when they acquire the property.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Adams v. Adams · Ismail v. Ismail
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.