Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 766 P2D 950 - Ford v. Ford

Ford v. Ford’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
2
states following
November 2025
most recently cited

37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently November 2025 · most notably Hough v. Leonard (1993), Thielenhaus v. Thielenhaus (1995)

37 state decisions

30019881990200020102020decided

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 Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. Pope · Johnson v. Johnson · Carpenter v. Carpenter · Mayhue v. Mayhue · Mitchell v. Ford Motor Credit 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In order for a spouse to successfully prove that enhanced value is the result of joint endeavors, it must be shown that the net worth of the property increased during the marriage as the direct result of substantial contribution by the spouse [i.e., per Thielenhaus , either spouse] of effort, skill or funds. Enhancement in the value of a spouse's separate property which is caused by appreciation, inflation, changing economic conditions, or circumstances beyond the parties' control is not jointly acquired property unless the non-owning spouse can prove that his/her [i.e., per Thielenhaus , either spouse's] contributions were also a causal factor. If so, the spouse is entitled to an interest in the appreciation of the property created through his/her efforts.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]he share of 'joint industry' attributable to the wife need not be in the form of a monetary contribution or actually working in the . . . office as suggested by the husband.”
    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.