Wright v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 5 U.S.C. § 8331 (Capitol Police Retirement Act) · 5 U.S.C. § 8339 · 5 U.S.C. § 8341 · 5 U.S.C. § 8342
Relies on Nastasio v. Cinnamon · Mika v. Mika · In Re the Marriage of Heddy · Yarbrough v. Office of Personnel Management · Marriage of Norman v. Norman
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Section § 452.330.1] gives the trial court great flexibility and far-reaching power to divide the marital property so as to accommodate the needs of the parties upon dissolution and there is no formula respecting the weight to be given the relevant factors which a court may consider.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Crews v. Crews
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.