McGee v. McGee’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently January 2020 · most notably Lacher v. Lacher (1999), Cook v. Cook (2011)
29 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 Guin v. Ha · Delahunty v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance · Adamson v. University of Alaska · Petersen v. Mutual Life Insuarance Co. of New York · Wright v. State
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b); (3) fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Lacher v. Lacher · Juelfs v. Gough“(1) the fundamental, underlying assumption of the dissolution agreement ha[s] been destroyed; (2) the parties' property division was poorly thought out; (8) the property division was reached without the benefit of counsel; and (4) the [property in dispute] was the parties' principal asset.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Powell v. Powell · Hopper v. Hopper“[the divorce judgment exception to Rule 82 does not apply to post-judgment modification and- enforcement motions”
2 later decisions 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.