Mortensen v. Mortensen’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
1 district · 34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently October 2024 · most notably Kimball v. Kimball (2009), 2008 UT App 11 - Stonehocker v. Stonehocker (2008)
1 district · 34 state decisions
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 68 Ill. App. 3d 513 - Klingberg v. Klingberg · In Re the Marriage of Herron · Van Newkirk v. Van Newkirk · 84 Ill. 2d 89 - In Re Marriage of Komnick · Noble v. Noble
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the other spouse has by his or her efforts or expense contributed to the enhancement, maintenance, or protection of that property, thereby acquiring an equitable interest in it, ... Or (2) the property has been consumed or its identity lost through commingling or exchanges.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“[cJourts have considered inherited property as part of the marital estate when "the other spouse has by his or her efforts augmented, maintained, or protected the inherited or donated property, when the parties have inextricably commingled the property with marital property so that it has lost its separate character, or when the recipient spouse has contributed all or part of the property to the marital estate."”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“'extraordinary situations where equity so demands”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Elman v. Elman · Henshaw v. Henshaw
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.