Thomas v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
December 2015
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Ogard v. Ogard · Brooks v. Brooks · Laing v. Laing · Moffitt v. Moffitt · Lewis v. Lewis
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, because the nonvested pension may, by definition, be forfeited in its entirety, it should not be considered when the trial court makes the initial property division at the time of the divorce. If and when the employee spouse’s pension rights vest and if the parties are unable to reach an agreement on their own, the non-employee spouse may at any time thereafter seek an order dividing the pension. This is to be done in the same manner as if the pension had been vested at the time of the divorce. ... Once the pension has vested, the trial court can determine whether the present value or the retained jurisdiction approach is appropriate in a given case and adapt that approach to the specific circumstances presented.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Root v. Root“when it is apparent ... that a non-vested pension will not vest,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dundas v. Dundas
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.