Hoffmann v. Hoffmann’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
158 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 160 later decisions — most recently January 2013 · most notably Woolridge v. Woolridge (1996), 81 N.C. App. 159 - Lawing v. Lawing (1986)
158 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
Applies 33 U.S.C. § 1251 (Alternative Water Sources Act of 2000)
Relies on Donahue v. Rodd Electrotype Co. of New England, Inc. · Dakan v. Dakan · Harper v. Harper · 28 Cal. 3d 366 - In Re Marriage of Moore · Laughlin v. Laughlin
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 160 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Property acquired by gift, bequest, devise or descent; (2) Property acquired in exchange for property acquired prior to the marriage or in exchange for property acquired by gift, bequest, devise, or descent; (3) Property acquired by a spouse after a decree of legal separation; (4) Property excluded by valid written agreement of the parties; and (5) The increase in the value of property acquired prior to the marriage or pursuant to subdivisions (1) to (4) of this subsection, unless marital assets including labor, have contributed to such increases and then only to the extent of such contributions. Section 452.330.2.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent““[T]he court shall set apart to each spouse his property and shall divide the marital property in such proportions as the court deems just after considering all relevant factors including: (1) The contribution of each spouse to the acquisition of the marital property, including the contribution of a spouse as homemaker; (2) The value of the property set apart to each spouse; (3) The economic circumstances of each spouse at the time the division of property is to become effective, including the desirability of awarding the family home or the right to live therein for reasonable periods to the spouse having custody of any children; and (4) The conduct of the parties during the marriage.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent““Under the source of funds rule, the character of the property is determined by the source of funds financing the purchase. The property is considered to be acquired as it is paid for so that a portion of the property’s ultimate value will be marital property.” (Our emphasis.)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Colborn v. Colborn · Neal v. Neal
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.