Dugan v. Dugan’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 127 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 143 later decisions — most recently December 2019 · most notably Smith v. Van Gorkom (1985), Glen Wall Associates v. Township of Wall (1985)
9 federal appellate · 127 state decisions — followed in 29 states
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 Painter v. Painter · 38 Cal. App. 3d 93 - In Re Marriage of Lopez · Stern v. Stern · Tessmar v. Grosner · Solari Industries, Inc. v. Malady
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 143 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... [goodwill] does not exist at the time professional qualifications and a license to practice are obtained. A good reputation is earned after accomplishment and performance. Field testing is an essential ingredient before goodwill comes into being. Future earning capacity per se is not goodwill. However, when that future earning capacity has been enhanced because reputation leads to probable future patronage from existing and potential clients, goodwill may exist and have value. When that occurs the resulting goodwill is property subject to equitable distribution. [ Id. at 433 ].”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"One appropriate method to determine the value of goodwill of a law practice can be accomplished by fixing the amount by which the attorney’s earnings exceed that which would have been earned as an employee by a person with similar qualifications of education, experience and capability. This is a fair manner in which to resolve the goodwill constituent. An attorney who earns $35,000 per year as an employee would, as any employee, not have goodwill properly ascribable to his employment. The same attorney earning a net income of the same amount from his individual practice should likewise not be considered to have property consisting of goodwill in ascertaining the value of his practice. See Levy v. Levy, [ 164 N.J.Super. 542 , 397 A.2d 374 (Ch.Div.1978) ]. "The court should first ascertain what an attorney of comparable experience, expertise, education and age would be earning as an employee in the same general locale. The effort that the practitioner expends on his law practice should not be overlooked when comparing his income to that of the hypothetical employee. A sole practitioner who, for example, works a regular sixty-hour week may have a significantly greater income than an employee who regularly works a forty-hour week, and the income may be due to greater productivity rather than the realization of income on the sole practitioner’s goodwill. Next, the attorney's net income before federal and state income taxes for a period of years, preferably five, should be determi”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“potential federal tax consequences should be considered in determining equitable distribution”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vincent Yonadi and Nancy Yonadi v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service, Mollie E. Yonadi v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service, Vincent Yonadi and Nancy Yonadi (Appellants in No. 93-7353), Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service (Appellant in No. 93-7354) · 237 N.J. Super. 342 - Orgler v. Orgler
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.