Stultz v. Stultz’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 602 (§ 402 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Andler v. Andler · Williams v. Rogier · 198 Ill. App. 3d 395 - Childerson v. Hess · Kaminszky v. Kukuch · Cap Gemini America, Inc. v. Judd
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“2. The primary issue to be determined by the court is whether the respondent [Mr. Stultz] is entitled to a credit against his child support obligation for the amount of the social security retirement benefits that the petitioner [Mrs. Stultz] receives on behalf of the children. 3. The court finds that the nature of the social security retirement benefits must be clarified to resolve this issue. The social security retirement benefits are the result of the respondent's being employed and his employment history. They are a product of contributions made over the years by the retiree and by his employer. The retirement benefits received by the children are not income to nor are they income of the retiree but they are benefits which were earned by him. Such benefits are not a means-tested public assistance that should be protected in any way from consideration in the fixing of the support obligation. The court also finds that such benefits are made available to the children at no purchase cost to the retiree. They became available, assuming a certain base level contribution by the retiree and his employer, no matter how many or how few children and they would not be available if there were no children. So there is nothing about those benefits that was purchased by the retiree. However, the retiree is providing those benefits by virtue of his employment history and his retirement. 4. The court finds that the controlling law is found in I.C. 31-1-11.5-12(a) which requires the court ”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Stultz v. Stultz“must yield to the specific rule set out in Poynter.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Stultz v. Stultz
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.