Bays v. Bays’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently September 2019
17 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 Wanberg v. Wanberg · Laing v. Laing · Moffitt v. Moffitt · Schanck v. Schanck · Dixon v. Dixon
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As noted above, the superior court found from the testimony of both parties, and the statements of their respective counsel, that the parties agreed Judy was entitled to one-half of the value of Raymond’s accumulated pension. Study of the record shows that Raymond considered the entire pension accrued during the parties’ cohabitation and marriage to be part of the marital estate. At trial, Raymond never differentiated the pension contributions he made before the parties’ marriage or those made after the parties’ separation. In light of the superior court’s finding as to this issue, and its evidentiary support in the record, we conclude that Raymond waived any objection to the superior court’s division of pension benefits as of the date of trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hatten v. Hatten“rehabilitative alimony or support of limited duration.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hooper v. Hooper
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.