Harrell v. Harrell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 state decisions

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.

1. “FINDINGS OF FACT ⅝ * ⅛ * * * 6. The ratio of months married and earning retirement to the total months in military service is ie%r>o or 67.2%. 7. At the time of the Harrell divorce on October 29, 1981, Herbert C. Harrell was receiving a net disposable retirement pay of $876.00 per month, and such is the monthly value of Mr. Harrell’s retirement benefits as of the date of the divorce. 8. Any increase in retirement benefits of Herbert C. Harrell after the date of the Harrell divorce is not subject to partition. 9. The military retirement benefits of Herbert C. Harrell were before the divorce court and were requested to be “awarded, divided and partitioned” as community property set forth in the pleadings of Opal Frances Harrell, and testimony of both parties and as being received in Herbert C. Harrell's statement of expenses and income. 10. The divorce court in the Harrell divorce considered and disposed of the military retirement benefits by denying all relief requested and not expressly granted in the Decree of Divorce. 11. The divorce court in the Harrell divorce considered and disposed of the military retirement benefits as community property as noted in the unequal division of the other community assets. 12.The divorce court in the Harrell divorce heard testimony that Herbert C. Harrell is an alcoholic and incapable of sustained employment. * * * * ⅜ # 15. Herbert C. Harrell and Opal Frances Harrell are not tenants in common as to the military retirement benefits. 18. A”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Harrell v. Harrell

2. “The provisions of S.1814 reversing the effect of the McCarty decision are retroactive to June 26, 1981, the date on which the U.S. Supreme Court issued that decision. That is, the committee intends the legislation to restore the law to what it was when the courts were permitted to apply State divorce laws to military retired pay. Former spouses divorced in the interim period between the McCarty decision and the effective date of this law will have the opportunity to return to court to have their decrees modified in light of this legislation. However, nothing in the bill would mandate payments of retired pay which had been disbursed during the period between the date of the McCarty decision and the effective date of this legislation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Breen v. Breen