Rowlan v. Rowlan’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 2011
4 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 5 U.S.C. § 8337 · 5 U.S.C. § 8345
Relies on Carpenter v. Carpenter · Irwin v. Irwin · Christmas v. Christmas · Wilhelm v. Wilhelm
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.
“of the benefits and classifies those benefits according to the nature of the assets they replace. The Court distinguished retirement benefits, which function as a substitute for life savings and would constitute joint property, from disability benefits received after divorcee which would replace post-coverture wages and therefore be the wage earners's separate property. Using this analysis, the Court found it was the nature of the benefits as replacement for husband's wages which determined the classification, not the label of the funds as”
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.