Kruger v. Kruger’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
66 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2011 · most notably McCarty v. McCarty (1981), Holcomb v. Holcomb (1989)
66 state decisions — followed in 24 states
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 10 U.S.C. § 1201 · 26 U.S.C. § 61 (Payment-in-Kind Tax Treatment Act of 1983) · 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (§ 2 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1053 (§ 203 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 38 U.S.C. § 3101 · 42 U.S.C. § 659 (§ 459 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Lynch v. United States · Bruce v. United States · Upper Pecos Ass'n v. Peterson · Reardon v. Meacham · 10 Cal. 3d 592 - In Re Marriage of Fithian
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A weekly wage represents income, but after its receipt the dollars on hand are an asset. ... The equitable distribution provision is not concerned with income but with a person’s assets in an economic sense on a date certain. The right to receive monies in the future is unquestionably such an economic resource. [73 N.J. at 468.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[e]ach of these cases acknowledged expressly or implicitly that, if the spouse acquired during the eligible period of the marriage a nonforfeitable or vested interest in the pension prior to retirement, that interest was subject to equitable distribution. That principle is sound.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.