Custer v. Custer’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
March 2004
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 1056 (§ 206 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Smith v. Mirman · Billington v. Crowder · Monsanto Co. v. Ford · Barnett v. Watco, Inc.
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.
“(a) Application of Retirement Equity Act of 1984. The Court determines that pursuant to the Retirement Equity Act of 1984 (Act) Public Law 98-397, Section 204 , $11,236.55 of Kenneth Wayne Custer’s retirement benefits under the Southern Electrical Retirement fund may be disbursed and distributed to Sylvia Angela Custer pursuant to this order as soon as administratively possible in the form provided in such respective plan. (b) Effective Date. This order is entered as a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, as that term is used in the Act.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Thus, contrary to Fund’s argument, disbursement of retirement plan funds to a nonparticipant spouse in compliance with a QDRO is not contingent upon the age of the participant spouse at the time the funds are to be distributed. Since the Custers' divorce decree is a “Qualified Domestic Relations Order” as defined by ERISA in 29 U.S.C. § 1056 (d)(3), the wife may receive the fund awarded to her by the court’s decree “as if the participant [the husband] had retired on the date on which such payment is to begin.” 29 U.S.C. § 1056 (d)(3)(E)(i)(II) (1985).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“provide for greater equity under private pension plans for workers and their spouses ... by taking into account changes in work patterns, the status of marriage as an economic partnership, and the substantial contribution to that partnership of spouses who work both in and outside the home.”
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.