Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 742 P2D 21 - Pepper v. Peacher

Pepper v. Peacher’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
February 2023
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 2023

5 state decisions

3019871990200020102020decided

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 26 Cal. 2d 173 - Grimm v. Grimm · 16 Cal. 2d 229 - Sullivan v. Union Oil Co. of Cal. · 35 Cal. 3d 599 - Life Insurance Co. of North America v. Cassidy · 267 Pa. Super. 124 - D'ORAZIO v. Locust Lake Village, Inc. · State Ex Rel. Marland v. Phillips Petroleum Co.

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

  1. “The rule of these cases is that divorce decree provisions will not be construed as a renunciation of an expectancy unless it clearly appears that the agreement was intended to deprive the ex-spouse of such a right. We do not find that the language relied on by appellant as indicating such an intended deprivation rises to the specificity necessary to imply a renunciation. (Emphasis added) (Footnotes omitted).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “We see no reason to distinguish our treatment of a claim to funds as beneficiary of an insurance policy from a claim based on designation as beneficiary as recipient of retirement funds. In either case the contract runs between the party with the power to make the designation of beneficiary and the party having the obligation to pay over funds to the beneficiary.”
    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.