727 So. 2d 622 - Lee v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 3201 (Railroad Retirement Tax Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 301 (§ 1 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 416 (§ 216 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 45 U.S.C. § 231 (Railroad Retirement Act of 1974) · 45 U.S.C. § 231A (Railroad Retirement Act of 1974) · 45 U.S.C. § 231N (Railroad Retirement Act of 1974)
Relies on Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo · 358 So. 2d 919 - Sims v. Sims · 332 So. 2d 834 - TL James & Co., Inc. v. Montgomery · 691 So. 2d 1245 - Osborne v. Ladner · 652 So. 2d 99 - Kambur v. Kambur
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This section shall not operate to prohibit the characterization or treatment of that portion of an annuity under this subchapter which is not computed under section 231b(a), 231c(a) or 231c(f) of this title, or any portion of a supplemental annuity under this subchapter, as community property for the purposes of, or property subject to, distribution in accordance with a court decree of divorce, annulment, or legal separation or the terms of any court-approved property settlement incident to any such court decree.”
2 later decisions 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.