Mann v. Mann’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently July 2023
13 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 402 (§ 202 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo · Laing v. Laing · Matter of Marriage of Swan and Swan · Burrell v. Burrell · 109 Cal. App. 3d 334 - In Re Marriage of Hillerman
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under the doctrine of federal preemption, when a state law and federal law conflict, state law must yield.... In Hillerman v. Hillerman, 109 Cal.App.3d 334 , 167 Cal.Rptr. 240 (1980), the California Court of Appeal concluded that there was a substantial conflict between California community property laws and the social security family benefit plan. The court reasoned that under the doctrine of federal preemption, it could not order the invasion of an employee spouse’s social security benefits on divorce. 167 CaLRptr. at 244-46.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Reffalt v. Reffalt“Unlike social security benefits, the division of state SBS benefits does not involve an infringement on federal law. The SBS system is created and governed by state law and regulations. SBS is a substitute for social security. Unlike social security, an employee has an absolute contractual right to receive SBS benefits.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Reffalt v. Reffalt
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.