Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 7 Wash. App. 394 - Pollock v. Pollock

7 Wash. App. 394 - Pollock v. Pollock’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
3
states following
April 2015
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently April 2015 · most notably 88 Wash. 2d 649 - In Re the Marriage of Hadley (1977), 69 Wash. App. 38 - Matter of Marriage of Hurd (1993)

27 state decisions

9019721980199020002010decided

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 80 Wash. 2d 293 - Friedlander v. Friedlander · 80 Wash. 2d 736 - Baker v. Baker · 5 Wash. App. 741 - DeRevere v. DeRevere · 44 Wash. 2d 851 - Hamlin v. Merlino · 5 Wash. 2d 446 - In Re Binge's Estate

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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “correct the decree to ameliorate or remove if possible the inequities fostered by it”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In a proceeding for dissolution of the marriage, legal separation, declaration of invalidity, or in a proceeding for disposition of property following dissolution of the marriage by a court which lacked personal jurisdiction over the absent spouse or lacked jurisdiction to dispose of the property, the court shall, without regard to marital misconduct, make such disposition of the property and the liabilities of the parties, either community or separate, as shall appear just and equitable after considering all relevant factors including, but not limited to: (1) The nature and extent of the community property; (2) The nature and extent of the separate property; (3) The duration of the marriage; and (4) 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 a spouse having custody of any children.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Following marriage, plaintiff continued to manage his separate property successfully. He derived substantial income from the combined use of his separate property and his services. However, the community was entitled to the economic benefit of his services. The rule is that if plaintiff seeks to retain the separate character of income derived from a combination of his separate business and his post-marital personal services with respect thereto, he is required to make a contemporaneous segregation of the income so derived as between the community and his separate estate. This can be accomplished by the allocation to the community of what in effect would be a reasonable salary for his services. The allocation in the nature of a salary, is then considered community income, and the balance of his income remains his separate property.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.