{
  "generated_at": "2026-05-15T05:17:53.216657+00:00",
  "artifact_generated_at": "2026-05-15T12:03:42.493Z",
  "run_name": "public_qdro_static_v0_20260514",
  "run_id": "c3fdbbfe-0559-4654-88b2-9c57a79fac9e",
  "corpus_version": "public_v0",
  "case_count": 2271,
  "source_permissions": "Public/official-source opinion text and machine-draft annotations only; no Westlaw/Lexis proprietary editorial material.",
  "cases": [
    {
      "slug": "agnes-feagin-v-willie-feagin-3364192",
      "title": "Agnes Feagin v. Willie Feagin.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Agnes Feagin v. Willie Feagin.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3368652/feagin-v-feagin-no-51-59-62-dec-13-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3368652",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-12-13",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "agnes feagin v. willie feagin. us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3368652 agnes feagin v. willie feagin. qualified_domestic_relations_order beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/agnes-feagin-v-willie-feagin-3364192"
    },
    {
      "slug": "allen-p-crolius-v-judy-ann-crolius-3339445",
      "title": "Allen P. Crolius v. Judy Ann Crolius",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Allen P. Crolius v. Judy Ann Crolius",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3343930/crolius-v-crolius-no-fa92-04-06-07-may-12-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3343930",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-05-12",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "allen p. crolius v. judy ann crolius us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3343930 allen p. crolius v. judy ann crolius qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/allen-p-crolius-v-judy-ann-crolius-3339445"
    },
    {
      "slug": "allison-stafford-v-jeffrey-stafford-3359974",
      "title": "Allison Stafford v. Jeffrey Stafford",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Allison Stafford v. Jeffrey Stafford",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3364440/stafford-v-stafford-no-fa90-04-92-88s-may-23-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3364440",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-05-23",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "allison stafford v. jeffrey stafford us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3364440 allison stafford v. jeffrey stafford qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/allison-stafford-v-jeffrey-stafford-3359974"
    },
    {
      "slug": "andree-lupinacci-v-arthur-lupinacci-jr-3370133",
      "title": "Andree Lupinacci v. Arthur Lupinacci, Jr.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Andree Lupinacci v. Arthur Lupinacci, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3374590/lupinacci-v-lupinacci-no-fa92-0126106-s-may-18-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3374590",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-05-18",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "andree lupinacci v. arthur lupinacci, jr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3374590 andree lupinacci v. arthur lupinacci, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/andree-lupinacci-v-arthur-lupinacci-jr-3370133"
    },
    {
      "slug": "andrew-vandersloot-v-mildred-vandersloot-3341860",
      "title": "Andrew Vandersloot v. Mildred Vandersloot",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Andrew Vandersloot v. Mildred Vandersloot",
      "extracted_docket_number": "number 70267",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3346344/vandersloot-v-vandersloot-no-fa-70267-jan-31-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3346344",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-01-31",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "andrew vandersloot v. mildred vandersloot us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3346344 number 70267 andrew vandersloot v. mildred vandersloot qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/andrew-vandersloot-v-mildred-vandersloot-3341860"
    },
    {
      "slug": "ann-smith-v-todd-r-smith-3356571",
      "title": "Ann Smith v. Todd R. Smith",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Ann Smith v. Todd R. Smith",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3361037/smith-v-smith-no-fa97-0326660-s-may-5-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3361037",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-05-05",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "ann smith v. todd r. smith us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3361037 ann smith v. todd r. smith qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/ann-smith-v-todd-r-smith-3356571"
    },
    {
      "slug": "arthur-v-burtaccio-jr-v-peggy-ann-burtaccio-3354092",
      "title": "Arthur v. Burtaccio, Jr. v. Peggy Ann Burtaccio.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Arthur v. Burtaccio, Jr. v. Peggy Ann Burtaccio.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3358560/burtaccio-v-burtaccio-no-fa01-0341966s-aug-16-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3358560",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-08-16",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "arthur v. burtaccio, jr. v. peggy ann burtaccio. us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3358560 arthur v. burtaccio, jr. v. peggy ann burtaccio. qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/arthur-v-burtaccio-jr-v-peggy-ann-burtaccio-3354092"
    },
    {
      "slug": "aura-maria-serdici-v-alexander-j-serdici-3337519",
      "title": "Aura Maria Serdici v. Alexander J. Serdici",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Aura Maria Serdici v. Alexander J. Serdici",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3342006/serdici-v-serdici-no-0544882-dec-18-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3342006",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-12-18",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "aura maria serdici v. alexander j. serdici us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3342006 aura maria serdici v. alexander j. serdici qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/aura-maria-serdici-v-alexander-j-serdici-3337519"
    },
    {
      "slug": "bahij-baz-v-vera-baz-3371940",
      "title": "Bahij Baz v. Vera Baz",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Bahij Baz v. Vera Baz",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3376395/baz-v-baz-no-fa93-0244504-jan-24-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3376395",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-01-24",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "bahij baz v. vera baz us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3376395 bahij baz v. vera baz qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/bahij-baz-v-vera-baz-3371940"
    },
    {
      "slug": "barbara-amaral-v-william-amaral-3356691",
      "title": "Barbara Amaral v. William Amaral.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Barbara Amaral v. William Amaral.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3361157/amaral-v-amaral-no-fa-00-0063037s-mar-19-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3361157",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-03-19",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "barbara amaral v. william amaral. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3361157 barbara amaral v. william amaral. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/barbara-amaral-v-william-amaral-3356691"
    },
    {
      "slug": "barbara-bedell-v-robert-bedell-3345555",
      "title": "Barbara Bedell v. Robert Bedell",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Barbara Bedell v. Robert Bedell",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3350034/bedell-v-bedell-no-52-25-06-dec-21-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3350034",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-12-21",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "barbara bedell v. robert bedell us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3350034 barbara bedell v. robert bedell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/barbara-bedell-v-robert-bedell-3345555"
    },
    {
      "slug": "barbara-dimaio-v-ralph-dimaio-3370811",
      "title": "Barbara Dimaio v. Ralph Dimaio",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Barbara Dimaio v. Ralph Dimaio",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3375267/dimaio-v-dimaio-no-fa97-0059827s-nov-5-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3375267",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-11-05",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "barbara dimaio v. ralph dimaio us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3375267 barbara dimaio v. ralph dimaio qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/barbara-dimaio-v-ralph-dimaio-3370811"
    },
    {
      "slug": "barbara-ganns-v-kevin-ganns-3346659",
      "title": "Barbara Ganns v. Kevin Ganns",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Barbara Ganns v. Kevin Ganns",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3351137/ganns-v-ganns-no-0545195-aug-5-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3351137",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-08-05",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "barbara ganns v. kevin ganns us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3351137 barbara ganns v. kevin ganns qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/barbara-ganns-v-kevin-ganns-3346659"
    },
    {
      "slug": "barbara-j-licursi-v-eugene-a-licursi-3347713",
      "title": "Barbara J. Licursi v. Eugene A. Licursi",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Barbara J. Licursi v. Eugene A. Licursi",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3352190/licursi-v-licursi-no-fa-91-0307684s-nov-22-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3352190",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-11-22",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "barbara j. licursi v. eugene a. licursi us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3352190 barbara j. licursi v. eugene a. licursi qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/barbara-j-licursi-v-eugene-a-licursi-3347713"
    },
    {
      "slug": "barbara-landock-v-christopher-landock-3325673",
      "title": "Barbara Landock v. Christopher Landock",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Barbara Landock v. Christopher Landock",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3330175/landock-v-landock-no-fa99-0065074s-jun-29-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3330175",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-06-29",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "barbara landock v. christopher landock us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3330175 barbara landock v. christopher landock qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/barbara-landock-v-christopher-landock-3325673"
    },
    {
      "slug": "barbara-mancino-v-john-mancino-3351610",
      "title": "Barbara Mancino v. John Mancino",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Barbara Mancino v. John Mancino",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3356081/mancino-v-mancino-no-fa-95-127989-apr-24-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3356081",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-04-24",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "barbara mancino v. john mancino us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3356081 barbara mancino v. john mancino qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/barbara-mancino-v-john-mancino-3351610"
    },
    {
      "slug": "barbara-speranza-v-anthony-speranza-3352216",
      "title": "Barbara Speranza v. Anthony Speranza",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Barbara Speranza v. Anthony Speranza",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3356685/speranza-v-speranza-no-fa99-0065538s-mar-31-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3356685",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-04-03",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "barbara speranza v. anthony speranza us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3356685 barbara speranza v. anthony speranza qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/barbara-speranza-v-anthony-speranza-3352216"
    },
    {
      "slug": "bernice-g-bishop-v-david-a-grant-3328606",
      "title": "Bernice G. Bishop v. David A. Grant",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Bernice G. Bishop v. David A. Grant",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3333106/bishop-v-grant-no-fa98-85544-jul-27-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3333106",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-07-27",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "bernice g. bishop v. david a. grant us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3333106 bernice g. bishop v. david a. grant qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/bernice-g-bishop-v-david-a-grant-3328606"
    },
    {
      "slug": "beryl-w-bouchard-v-bertpand-j-bouchard-3358416",
      "title": "Beryl W. Bouchard v. Bertpand J. Bouchard.",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Beryl W. Bouchard v. Bertpand J. Bouchard.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3362881/bouchard-v-bouchard-no-fa98-0148381s-oct-24-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3362881",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-10-24",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "beryl w. bouchard v. bertpand j. bouchard. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3362881 beryl w. bouchard v. bertpand j. bouchard. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/beryl-w-bouchard-v-bertpand-j-bouchard-3358416"
    },
    {
      "slug": "beryl-w-bouchard-v-bertrand-j-bouchard-3367599",
      "title": "Beryl W. Bouchard v. Bertrand J. Bouchard",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Beryl W. Bouchard v. Bertrand J. Bouchard",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3372059/bouchard-v-bouchard-no-fa98-0148381-jan-7-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3372059",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-01-07",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "beryl w. bouchard v. bertrand j. bouchard us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3372059 beryl w. bouchard v. bertrand j. bouchard qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/beryl-w-bouchard-v-bertrand-j-bouchard-3367599"
    },
    {
      "slug": "betsy-harwood-v-john-harwood-jr-3370784",
      "title": "Betsy Harwood v. John Harwood, Jr.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Betsy Harwood v. John Harwood, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3375240/harwood-v-harwood-no-fa95-032-54-97-s-jan-22-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3375240",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-01-22",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "betsy harwood v. john harwood, jr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3375240 betsy harwood v. john harwood, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/betsy-harwood-v-john-harwood-jr-3370784"
    },
    {
      "slug": "betsy-wettish-v-robert-c-wettish-3368679",
      "title": "Betsy Wettish v. Robert C. Wettish",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Betsy Wettish v. Robert C. Wettish",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3373138/wettish-v-wettish-no-fa98-85324-feb-19-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3373138",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-02-19",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "betsy wettish v. robert c. wettish us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3373138 betsy wettish v. robert c. wettish qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/betsy-wettish-v-robert-c-wettish-3368679"
    },
    {
      "slug": "brenda-snider-v-leroy-snider-3364254",
      "title": "Brenda Snider v. Leroy Snider.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Brenda Snider v. Leroy Snider.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3368714/snider-v-snider-no-fa02-0076870-mar-10-2003/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3368714",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2003-03-10",
      "citation_year": 2003,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "brenda snider v. leroy snider. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3368714 brenda snider v. leroy snider. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/brenda-snider-v-leroy-snider-3364254"
    },
    {
      "slug": "carol-ann-kofol-v-august-kofol-3767551",
      "title": "Carol Ann Kofol v. August Kofol",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Carol Ann Kofol v. August Kofol",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4012429/kofol-v-kofol-unpublished-decision-6-17-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4012429",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-06-17",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "carol ann kofol v. august kofol us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 4012429 carol ann kofol v. august kofol qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/carol-ann-kofol-v-august-kofol-3767551"
    },
    {
      "slug": "carol-e-gulick-v-rodwin-e-gulick-3353015",
      "title": "Carol E. Gulick v. Rodwin E. Gulick",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Carol E. Gulick v. Rodwin E. Gulick",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3357484/gulick-v-gulick-no-31-72-21-jan-25-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3357484",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-01-25",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "carol e. gulick v. rodwin e. gulick us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3357484 carol e. gulick v. rodwin e. gulick qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/carol-e-gulick-v-rodwin-e-gulick-3353015"
    },
    {
      "slug": "carol-s-sauls-v-samuel-sauls-3365222",
      "title": "Carol S. Sauls v. Samuel Sauls",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Carol S. Sauls v. Samuel Sauls",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3369682/sauls-v-sauls-no-fa93-0133877-s-sep-16-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3369682",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-09-16",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "carol s. sauls v. samuel sauls us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3369682 carol s. sauls v. samuel sauls qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/carol-s-sauls-v-samuel-sauls-3365222"
    },
    {
      "slug": "carolyn-e-barrett-v-william-d-barrett-3328310",
      "title": "Carolyn E. Barrett v. William D. Barrett.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Carolyn E. Barrett v. William D. Barrett.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3332810/barrett-v-barrett-no-fa-00-0340416-may-31-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3332810",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-05-31",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "carolyn e. barrett v. william d. barrett. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3332810 carolyn e. barrett v. william d. barrett. qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/carolyn-e-barrett-v-william-d-barrett-3328310"
    },
    {
      "slug": "carolyn-j-ryder-v-kenyon-j-ryder-3356767",
      "title": "Carolyn J. Ryder v. Kenyon J. Ryder.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Carolyn J. Ryder v. Kenyon J. Ryder.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3361233/ryder-v-ryder-no-0548689-may-23-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3361233",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-05-23",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "carolyn j. ryder v. kenyon j. ryder. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3361233 carolyn j. ryder v. kenyon j. ryder. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/carolyn-j-ryder-v-kenyon-j-ryder-3356767"
    },
    {
      "slug": "catalina-betancourt-v-david-c-betancourt-3335078",
      "title": "Catalina Betancourt v. David C. Betancourt",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Catalina Betancourt v. David C. Betancourt",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3339568/betancourt-v-betancourt-no-110750-feb-17-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3339568",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-02-17",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "catalina betancourt v. david c. betancourt us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3339568 catalina betancourt v. david c. betancourt qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/catalina-betancourt-v-david-c-betancourt-3335078"
    },
    {
      "slug": "catherine-g-perina-v-martin-l-perina-3346266",
      "title": "Catherine G. Perina v. Martin L. Perina",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Catherine G. Perina v. Martin L. Perina",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3350744/perina-v-perina-no-fa94-0534126-apr-23-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3350744",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-04-23",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "catherine g. perina v. martin l. perina us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3350744 catherine g. perina v. martin l. perina qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/catherine-g-perina-v-martin-l-perina-3346266"
    },
    {
      "slug": "catherine-m-duthrie-v-jeffrey-a-duthrie-3325377",
      "title": "Catherine M. Duthrie v. Jeffrey A. Duthrie",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Catherine M. Duthrie v. Jeffrey A. Duthrie",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3329879/duthrie-v-duthrie-no-0112973-nov-10-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3329879",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-11-10",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "catherine m. duthrie v. jeffrey a. duthrie us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3329879 catherine m. duthrie v. jeffrey a. duthrie qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/catherine-m-duthrie-v-jeffrey-a-duthrie-3325377"
    },
    {
      "slug": "cecelia-m-langevin-v-paul-a-langevin-3328244",
      "title": "Cecelia M. Langevin v. Paul A. Langevin",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Cecelia M. Langevin v. Paul A. Langevin",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3332744/langevin-v-langevin-no-fa-95-0067048-dec-20-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3332744",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-12-20",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "cecelia m. langevin v. paul a. langevin us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3332744 cecelia m. langevin v. paul a. langevin qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/cecelia-m-langevin-v-paul-a-langevin-3328244"
    },
    {
      "slug": "charlene-smikle-v-gaston-smikle-3350147",
      "title": "Charlene Smikle v. Gaston Smikle",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Charlene Smikle v. Gaston Smikle",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3354621/smikle-v-smikle-no-fa89-0102805-s-apr-25-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3354621",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-04-25",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "charlene smikle v. gaston smikle us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3354621 charlene smikle v. gaston smikle qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/charlene-smikle-v-gaston-smikle-3350147"
    },
    {
      "slug": "cheryl-freedman-v-marc-freedman-3349746",
      "title": "Cheryl Freedman v. Marc Freedman.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Cheryl Freedman v. Marc Freedman.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3354220/freedman-v-freedman-no-fa-99-0447352-s-oct-19-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3354220",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-10-19",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "cheryl freedman v. marc freedman. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3354220 cheryl freedman v. marc freedman. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/cheryl-freedman-v-marc-freedman-3349746"
    },
    {
      "slug": "christina-rusinik-v-joseph-v-rusinik-3339858",
      "title": "Christina Rusinik v. Joseph v. Rusinik",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Christina Rusinik v. Joseph v. Rusinik",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3344343/rusinik-v-rusinik-no-fa92-04-14-53-jan-25-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3344343",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-01-25",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "christina rusinik v. joseph v. rusinik us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3344343 christina rusinik v. joseph v. rusinik qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/christina-rusinik-v-joseph-v-rusinik-3339858"
    },
    {
      "slug": "christopher-j-sullivan-v-susan-b-sullivan-3339173",
      "title": "Christopher J. Sullivan v. Susan B. Sullivan",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Christopher J. Sullivan v. Susan B. Sullivan",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3343659/sullivan-v-sullivan-no-0115210-sep-28-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3343659",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-09-28",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "christopher j. sullivan v. susan b. sullivan us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3343659 christopher j. sullivan v. susan b. sullivan qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/christopher-j-sullivan-v-susan-b-sullivan-3339173"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10000340-10000340",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10000340",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Matter of Jaime Dion Wright and Bradley Eugene Wright",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "811 F.2d 1249",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10000340 us pension / defined benefit issues 811 f.2d 1249 in re the matter of jaime dion wright and bradley eugene wright qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10000340-10000340"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10069466-10069466",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10069466",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10069466",
      "extracted_docket_number": "360. Noting a legal issue percolating",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "150 F.3d 1011",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10069466 us erisa / defined contribution issues 360. noting a legal issue percolating 150 f.3d 1011 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10069466-10069466"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10074239-10074239",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10074239",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10074239",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "342 F.3d 903",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10074239 us pension / defined benefit issues 342 f.3d 903 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10074239-10074239"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10076278-10076278",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10076278",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10076278",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "234 F.3d 27",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10076278 us pension / defined benefit issues 234 f.3d 27 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10076278-10076278"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10077430-10077430",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10077430",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10077430",
      "extracted_docket_number": "99. 21 The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "361 F.3d 566",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10077430 us erisa / defined contribution issues 99. 21 the 361 f.3d 566 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10077430-10077430"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10080106-10080106",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10080106",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10080106",
      "extracted_docket_number": "50. Oppositions were 25",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "250 F.3d 668",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10080106 us pension / defined benefit issues 50. oppositions were 25 250 f.3d 668 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10080106-10080106"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10082165-10082165",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10082165",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10082165",
      "extracted_docket_number": "8. Plaintiff",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "425 U.S. 738",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10082165 us pension / defined benefit issues 8. plaintiff 425 u.s. 738 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10082165-10082165"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10082976-10082976",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10082976",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10082976",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18. Plaintiff",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "967 F.2d 1298",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10082976 us pension / defined benefit issues 18. plaintiff 967 f.2d 1298 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10082976-10082976"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10086617-10086617",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10086617",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10086617",
      "extracted_docket_number": "103. 10 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 11 Defendant Young",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "142 S. Ct. 7",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10086617 us pension / defined benefit issues 103. 10 request for judicial notice 11 defendant young 142 s. ct. 7 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10086617-10086617"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10087073-10087073",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10087073",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10087073",
      "extracted_docket_number": "45. 25 Defendant Young",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "608 F.3d 1118",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10087073 us erisa / defined contribution issues 45. 25 defendant young 608 f.3d 1118 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10087073-10087073"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10088634-10088634",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10088634",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10088634",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "425 U.S. 391",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10088634 us pension / defined benefit issues 425 u.s. 391 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10088634-10088634"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10089520-10089520",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10089520",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10089520",
      "extracted_docket_number": "242. The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 317",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10089520 us pension / defined benefit issues 242. the 477 u.s. 317 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10089520-10089520"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10090002-10090002",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10090002",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10090002",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "73 F.3d 1057",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10090002 us erisa / defined contribution issues 73 f.3d 1057 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10090002-10090002"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10095241-10095241",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10095241",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10095241",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10095241 us pension / defined benefit issues 477 u.s. 242 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10095241-10095241"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10111460-10111460",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10111460",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10111460",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10111460 us pension / defined benefit issues 477 u.s. 242 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10111460-10111460"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10125348-10125348",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10125348",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "TES v. EMILY REEVES PRESSLEY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "377 F.3d 1173",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10125348 us erisa / defined contribution issues 377 f.3d 1173 tes v. emily reeves pressley qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10125348-10125348"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10126607-10126607",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10126607",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10126607",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10126607 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10126607-10126607"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10139374-10139374",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10139374",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Black",
      "extracted_docket_number": "19-3. Trout",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10139374 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 19-3. trout domestic relations order in re marriage of black qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10139374-10139374"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10141410-10141410",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10141410",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Murphy",
      "extracted_docket_number": "58",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "130 F.3d 1245",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10141410 us pension / defined benefit issues 58 130 f.3d 1245 in re marriage of murphy qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10141410-10141410"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10148838-10148838",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10148838",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10148838",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of participants",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "714 F.3d 1017",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10148838 us pension / defined benefit issues of participants 714 f.3d 1017 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10148838-10148838"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10158142-10158142",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10158142",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10158142",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "150 F.3d 729",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10158142 us pension / defined benefit issues 150 f.3d 729 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10158142-10158142"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10160562-10160562",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10160562",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10160562",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "103 F.3d 584",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10160562 us pension / defined benefit issues 103 f.3d 584 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10160562-10160562"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10166711-10166711",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10166711",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10166711",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10166711 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10166711-10166711"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10168308-10168308",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10168308",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10168308",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10168308 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10168308-10168308"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10178855-10178855",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10178855",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10178855",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "607 F.3d 1102",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10178855 us erisa / defined contribution issues 607 f.3d 1102 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10178855-10178855"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10179295-10179295",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10179295",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10179295",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "877 F.3d 698",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10179295 us erisa / defined contribution issues 877 f.3d 698 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10179295-10179295"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10196910-10196910",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10196910",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10196910",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "766 F.3d 87",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10196910 us pension / defined benefit issues 766 f.3d 87 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10196910-10196910"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10200666-10200666",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10200666",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "THE ESTATE OF CHRISTOPHER SHEPPARD v. WILLIAM D. MCLAUGHLIN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "557 F.3d 22",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10200666 us pension / defined benefit issues 557 f.3d 22 the estate of christopher sheppard v. william d. mclaughlin qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10200666-10200666"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10201215-10201215",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10201215",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10201215",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "950 F.2d 816",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10201215 us pension / defined benefit issues 950 f.2d 816 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10201215-10201215"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10203904-10203904",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10203904",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10203904",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1. A hearing is not necessary to resolve the present",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "721 F.3d 241",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10203904 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1. a hearing is not necessary to resolve the present 721 f.3d 241 qualified_domestic_relations_order alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10203904-10203904"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10207150-10207150",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10207150",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10207150",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months Stone was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "669 F.3d 448",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10207150 us pension / defined benefit issues of months stone was 669 f.3d 448 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10207150-10207150"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10213309-10213309",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10213309",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10213309",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "489 U.S. 101",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10213309 us pension / defined benefit issues 489 u.s. 101 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10213309-10213309"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10214009-10214009",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10214009",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "HON. TERRENCE G. BERG v. ORDER GRANTING MOTION KAIJA MENYON PACK",
      "extracted_docket_number": "26. But Pack later",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10214009 us pension / defined benefit issues 26. but pack later 477 u.s. 242 hon. terrence g. berg v. order granting motion kaija menyon pack qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10214009-10214009"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10217808-10217808",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10217808",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10217808",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "150 F.3d 609",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10217808 us pension / defined benefit issues 150 f.3d 609 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10217808-10217808"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10219312-10219312",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10219312",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10219312",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "643 F.3d 162",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10219312 us pension / defined benefit issues 643 f.3d 162 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10219312-10219312"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10220518-10220518",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10220518",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10220518",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10220518 us erisa / defined contribution issues 477 u.s. 242 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10220518-10220518"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10227696-10227696",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10227696",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10227696",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Nos. 8",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10227696 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues nos. 8 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10227696-10227696"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10230230-10230230",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10230230",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10230230",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "588 F.3d 585",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10230230 us erisa / defined contribution issues 588 f.3d 585 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10230230-10230230"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10233414-10233414",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10233414",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10233414",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "863 F.2d 33",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10233414 us pension / defined benefit issues 863 f.2d 33 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10233414-10233414"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10233730-10233730",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10233730",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10233730",
      "extracted_docket_number": "number as a conjoined proceeding",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "478 F.2d 719",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10233730 us pension / defined benefit issues number as a conjoined proceeding 478 f.2d 719 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10233730-10233730"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10241105-10241105",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10241105",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10241105",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "520 U.S. 833",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10241105 us pension / defined benefit issues 520 u.s. 833 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10241105-10241105"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10260965-10260965",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10260965",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10260965",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10260965 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10260965-10260965"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10262507-10262507",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10262507",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10262507",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "521 U.S. 591",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10262507 us pension / defined benefit issues 521 u.s. 591 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10262507-10262507"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10262794-10262794",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10262794",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10262794",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10262794 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10262794-10262794"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10267305-10267305",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10267305",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10267305",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "424 U.S. 800",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10267305 us erisa / defined contribution issues 424 u.s. 800 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10267305-10267305"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10279245-10279245",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10279245",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10279245",
      "extracted_docket_number": "8 in this regard. The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10279245 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 8 in this regard. the domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10279245-10279245"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10286232-10286232",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10286232",
      "citation": "QUALIFIED DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of McFarland",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "71 S.W.3d 529",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10286232 us erisa / defined contribution issues 71 s.w.3d 529 in re marriage of mcfarland qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10286232-10286232"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10287389-10287389",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10287389",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10287389",
      "extracted_docket_number": "7 19 Defendant. 20 Before the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "559 F.2d 557",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10287389 us pension / defined benefit issues 7 19 defendant. 20 before the 559 f.2d 557 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10287389-10287389"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10288978-10288978",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10288978",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10288978",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1. The interpleader complaint asks the 14",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 317",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10288978 us pension / defined benefit issues 1. the interpleader complaint asks the 14 477 u.s. 317 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10288978-10288978"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10319152-10319152",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10319152",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10319152",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Number 29. Dated: December 5",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "927 F.3d 81",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10319152 us pension / defined benefit issues number 29. dated: december 5 927 f.3d 81 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10319152-10319152"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10321610-10321610",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10321610",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LLC v. GKO",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "861 F. Supp. 2d 262",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10321610 us pension / defined benefit issues 861 f. supp. 2d 262 llc v. gko qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10321610-10321610"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10321613-10321613",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10321613",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LLC v. GKO",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "861 F. Supp. 2d 262",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10321613 us pension / defined benefit issues 861 f. supp. 2d 262 llc v. gko qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10321613-10321613"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10321839-10321839",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10321839",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10321839",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 317",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10321839 us pension / defined benefit issues 477 u.s. 317 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10321839-10321839"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1033631-1033631",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1033631",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1033631",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "646 F.3d 504",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1033631 us pension / defined benefit issues 646 f.3d 504 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1033631-1033631"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1034489-1034489",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1034489",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of JOAN M. and",
      "extracted_docket_number": "and location. Donald asked the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "18 Cal.3d 365",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1034489 us pension / defined benefit issues and location. donald asked the 18 cal.3d 365 in re marriage of joan m. and qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1034489-1034489"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10346325-10346325",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10346325",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10346325",
      "extracted_docket_number": "430",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10346325 us pension / defined benefit issues 430 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10346325-10346325"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10352375-10352375",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10352375",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10352375",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10352375 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10352375-10352375"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1035522-1035522",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1035522",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1035522",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "677 F.3d 178",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1035522 us erisa / defined contribution issues 677 f.3d 178 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1035522-1035522"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1036323-1036323",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1036323",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1036323",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "635 P.2d 1186",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1036323 us pension / defined benefit issues 635 p.2d 1186 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1036323-1036323"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10374035-10374035",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10374035",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10374035",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "108 F.3d 86",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10374035 us pension / defined benefit issues 108 f.3d 86 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10374035-10374035"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1038717-1038717",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1038717",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of RICHARD J. and",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1038717 us pension / defined benefit issues in re the marriage of richard j. and qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1038717-1038717"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10396361-10396361",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10396361",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "OPINION & ORDER v. HILLSBORO MEDICAL CENTER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "28. Frozen Plan in any of those years. Accordingly",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10396361 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 28. frozen plan in any of those years. accordingly domestic relations order opinion & order v. hillsboro medical center qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10396361-10396361"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10401958-10401958",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10401958",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10401958",
      "extracted_docket_number": "25. Mr. Bowman incorporates an earlier",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "850 F.3d 526",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10401958 us pension / defined benefit issues 25. mr. bowman incorporates an earlier 850 f.3d 526 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10401958-10401958"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10402432-10402432",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10402432",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10402432",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-1. The State",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "605 F.3d 223",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10402432 us pension / defined benefit issues 1-1. the state 605 f.3d 223 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10402432-10402432"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10402876-10402876",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10402876",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10402876",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-1. The State",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "605 F.3d 223",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10402876 us pension / defined benefit issues 1-1. the state 605 f.3d 223 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10402876-10402876"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10404492-10404492",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10404492",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10404492",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21. Alight then timely",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "71 F.3d 29",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10404492 us pension / defined benefit issues 21. alight then timely 71 f.3d 29 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10404492-10404492"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10407029-10407029",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10407029",
      "citation": "Qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10407029",
      "extracted_docket_number": "12. The verdict and judgment were upheld on",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "550 U.S. 544",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10407029 us pension / defined benefit issues 12. the verdict and judgment were upheld on 550 u.s. 544 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10407029-10407029"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10407410-10407410",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10407410",
      "citation": "Qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10407410",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10. The verdict and judgment were upheld on",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "550 U.S. 544",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10407410 us pension / defined benefit issues 10. the verdict and judgment were upheld on 550 u.s. 544 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10407410-10407410"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10407815-10407815",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10407815",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10407815",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "428 F.3d 478",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10407815 us pension / defined benefit issues 428 f.3d 478 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10407815-10407815"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10408757-10408757",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10408757",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10408757",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "527 F.3d 358",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10408757 us pension / defined benefit issues 527 f.3d 358 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10408757-10408757"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10419781-10419781",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10419781",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "NAACP v. N",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10419781 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order naacp v. n qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10419781-10419781"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10440385-10440385",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10440385",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10440385",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 317",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10440385 us pension / defined benefit issues 477 u.s. 317 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10440385-10440385"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10441247-10441247",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10441247",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10441247",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "237 F.3d 598",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10441247 us erisa / defined contribution issues 237 f.3d 598 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10441247-10441247"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1044207-1044207",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1044207",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MICHAEL DANIEL FRY v. YURIKO SHINODA FRY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2012-01541-COA-R3-CV-",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "18 S.W.3d 621",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1044207 us pension / defined benefit issues m2012-01541-coa-r3-cv- 18 s.w.3d 621 michael daniel fry v. yuriko shinoda fry qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1044207-1044207"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1044313-1044313",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1044313",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "VIOLET CORROZZO v. JOSEPH CORROZZO",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2012-01317-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "826 S.W.2d 443",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1044313 us pension / defined benefit issues m2012-01317-coa-r3-cv - 826 s.w.2d 443 violet corrozzo v. joseph corrozzo qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1044313-1044313"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1045226-1045226",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1045226",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "FRANCESCA MARIA PIER v. KATHERINE JUNGKIND",
      "extracted_docket_number": "W2012-00872-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1045226 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues w2012-00872-coa-r3-cv - domestic relations order francesca maria pier v. katherine jungkind qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1045226-1045226"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10454761-10454761",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10454761",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10454761",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entry in this administrative bankruptcy case 2:18-b",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "943 F.3d 434",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10454761 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues entry in this administrative bankruptcy case 2:18-b 943 f.3d 434 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10454761-10454761"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10454767-10454767",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10454767",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10454767",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entry in this administrative bankruptcy case 2:18-b",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "217 F.3d 1072",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10454767 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues entry in this administrative bankruptcy case 2:18-b 217 f.3d 1072 qualified_domestic_relations_order beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10454767-10454767"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10455629-10455629",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10455629",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10455629",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "560 U.S. 770",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10455629 us pension / defined benefit issues 560 u.s. 770 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10455629-10455629"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10457501-10457501",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10457501",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10457501",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "564 U.S. 462",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10457501 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 564 u.s. 462 qualified_domestic_relations_order alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10457501-10457501"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10457748-10457748",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10457748",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10457748",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "504 U.S. 753",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10457748 us pension / defined benefit issues 504 u.s. 753 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10457748-10457748"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1045778-1045778",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1045778",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "UNA P. IRVIN v. ERNEST J. IRVIN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2011-02424-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "676 S.W.2d 554",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1045778 us pension / defined benefit issues m2011-02424-coa-r3-cv - 676 s.w.2d 554 una p. irvin v. ernest j. irvin qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1045778-1045778"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10457789-10457789",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10457789",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Johnston",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "894 F.2d 371",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10457789 us pension / defined benefit issues 894 f.2d 371 in re marriage of johnston qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10457789-10457789"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10458328-10458328",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10458328",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10458328",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1. A hearing is not necessary to resolve the present",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "721 F.3d 241",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10458328 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1. a hearing is not necessary to resolve the present 721 f.3d 241 qualified_domestic_relations_order alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10458328-10458328"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10459314-10459314",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10459314",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Cracker",
      "extracted_docket_number": "No. 14",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "573 U.S. 122",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10459314 us pension / defined benefit issues no. 14 573 u.s. 122 in re estate of cracker qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10459314-10459314"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10459901-10459901",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10459901",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10459901",
      "extracted_docket_number": "and of facts that are part of public records",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "605 F.2d 1169",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10459901 us pension / defined benefit issues and of facts that are part of public records 605 f.2d 1169 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10459901-10459901"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10459911-10459911",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10459911",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10459911",
      "extracted_docket_number": "in this case. See St. Louis Baptist Temple",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10459911 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues in this case. see st. louis baptist temple domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10459911-10459911"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10459976-10459976",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10459976",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10459976",
      "extracted_docket_number": "22-10933-t13 Debtor. OPINION Before the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "605 F.2d 1169",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10459976 us pension / defined benefit issues 22-10933-t13 debtor. opinion before the 605 f.2d 1169 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10459976-10459976"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10460289-10460289",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10460289",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10460289",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "708 F.2d 865",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10460289 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 708 f.2d 865 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10460289-10460289"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10460341-10460341",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10460341",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LLP v. HSBC",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "521 F.3d 130",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10460341 us pension / defined benefit issues 521 f.3d 130 llp v. hsbc qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10460341-10460341"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10461157-10461157",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10461157",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10461157",
      "extracted_docket_number": "in the bankruptcy case reflects that no objection t",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "471 F.3d 391",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10461157 us erisa / defined contribution issues in the bankruptcy case reflects that no objection t 471 f.3d 391 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10461157-10461157"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10461243-10461243",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10461243",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10461243",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10461243 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10461243-10461243"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10461262-10461262",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10461262",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10461262",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of factors figured into the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10461262 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues of factors figured into the domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10461262-10461262"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10461879-10461879",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10461879",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10461879",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "748 F.3d 142",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10461879 us pension / defined benefit issues 748 f.3d 142 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10461879-10461879"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10462250-10462250",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10462250",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10462250",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "868 F.2d 614",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10462250 us pension / defined benefit issues 868 f.2d 614 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10462250-10462250"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10462451-10462451",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10462451",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10462451",
      "extracted_docket_number": "maintained by the Bankruptcy Clerk in Adversary Pro",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "500 F.3d 344",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10462451 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues maintained by the bankruptcy clerk in adversary pro 500 f.3d 344 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10462451-10462451"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10462455-10462455",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10462455",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10462455",
      "extracted_docket_number": "maintained by the Bankruptcy Clerk in Adversary Pro",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "500 F.3d 344",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10462455 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues maintained by the bankruptcy clerk in adversary pro 500 f.3d 344 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10462455-10462455"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10463930-10463930",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10463930",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF CHELSEY JAON NUNEZ AND ELIAS NUNEZ",
      "extracted_docket_number": "23-1452",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "733 N.W.2d 683",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10463930 us pension / defined benefit issues 23-1452 733 n.w.2d 683 in re the marriage of chelsey jaon nunez and elias nunez qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10463930-10463930"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10463932-10463932",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10463932",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF HOLLY LYNN TRULSON AND TIMOTHY TODD TRULSON Upon the Petition of HOLLY LYNN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "23-0732",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "827 N.W.2d 671",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10463932 us pension / defined benefit issues 23-0732 827 n.w.2d 671 in re the marriage of holly lynn trulson and timothy todd trulson upon the petition of holly lynn qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10463932-10463932"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10466032-10466032",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10466032",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10466032",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10466032 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10466032-10466032"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10469835-10469835",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10469835",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10469835",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER Appellant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "759 F.2d 9",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10469835 us pension / defined benefit issues number appellant 759 f.2d 9 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10469835-10469835"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10473907-10473907",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10473907",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10473907",
      "extracted_docket_number": "368469 Lapeer Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10473907 us pension / defined benefit issues 368469 lapeer circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10473907-10473907"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10473931-10473931",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10473931",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re ESTATE OF JENNIFER L. FOWLER. SHELLIE SPACIL",
      "extracted_docket_number": "365600 St. Clair Probate",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "447 F3d 967",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10473931 us pension / defined benefit issues 365600 st. clair probate 447 f3d 967 in re estate of jennifer l. fowler. shellie spacil qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10473931-10473931"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1047448-1047448",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1047448",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ROY L. HAMILTON v. ELIZABETH K. HAMILTON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2010-02329-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1047448 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues m2010-02329-coa-r3-cv - domestic relations order roy l. hamilton v. elizabeth k. hamilton qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1047448-1047448"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1047693-1047693",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1047693",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "PEGGY DIANA SCHROER v. RICHARD MICHAEL SCHROER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2010-01478-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "902 S.W.2d 918",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1047693 us pension / defined benefit issues m2010-01478-coa-r3-cv - 902 s.w.2d 918 peggy diana schroer v. richard michael schroer qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1047693-1047693"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1047704-1047704",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1047704",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JEANETTE HILL v. MICHAEL LESTER HILL",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "43 S.W.3d 918",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1047704 us erisa / defined contribution issues 43 s.w.3d 918 jeanette hill v. michael lester hill qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1047704-1047704"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1047953-1047953",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1047953",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "UNA P. IRVIN v. ERNEST J. IRVIN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2010-01962-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1047953 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues m2010-01962-coa-r3-cv - domestic relations order una p. irvin v. ernest j. irvin qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1047953-1047953"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1048137-1048137",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1048137",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "PATRICIA ANN GHO MASSEY v. GREGORY JOEL CASALS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "W2010-00284-COA-R3-JV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "315 S.W.3d 788",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1048137 us pension / defined benefit issues w2010-00284-coa-r3-jv - 315 s.w.3d 788 patricia ann gho massey v. gregory joel casals qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1048137-1048137"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1048219-1048219",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1048219",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ANTHONY V. JACKSON v. GINGER JACKSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2010-00575-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "861 S.W.2d 230",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1048219 us pension / defined benefit issues m2010-00575-coa-r3-cv - 861 s.w.2d 230 anthony v. jackson v. ginger jackson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1048219-1048219"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1048228-1048228",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1048228",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "RONNIE GALE GILL v. NANCY JANE GILL",
      "extracted_docket_number": "W2010-00921-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "16 S.W.3d 356",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1048228 us pension / defined benefit issues w2010-00921-coa-r3-cv - 16 s.w.3d 356 ronnie gale gill v. nancy jane gill qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1048228-1048228"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1048239-1048239",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1048239",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JR. v. SUSAN M. STIEL",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2010-01459-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 S.W.2d 823",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1048239 us pension / defined benefit issues m2010-01459-coa-r3-cv - 937 s.w.2d 823 jr. v. susan m. stiel qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1048239-1048239"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10487670-10487670",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10487670",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JAY SALKINI v. IMAN SALKINI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-C-15-102131 REPORTED",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "761 A.2d 949",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10487670 us erisa / defined contribution issues 13-c-15-102131 reported 761 a.2d 949 jay salkini v. iman salkini qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10487670-10487670"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10487962-10487962",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10487962",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re MARRIAGE OF COLLEEN KENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-19-0905 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10487962 us pension / defined benefit issues 2-19-0905 order in re marriage of colleen kent qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10487962-10487962"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10488422-10488422",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10488422",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re MARRIAGE OF BARBARA ANN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "sheets and the QDRO itself",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10488422 us pension / defined benefit issues sheets and the qdro itself in re marriage of barbara ann qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10488422-10488422"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10489061-10489061",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10489061",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Budorick",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10489061 us pension / defined benefit issues in re marriage of budorick qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10489061-10489061"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10489405-10489405",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10489405",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re ESTATE OF LISA R. LOESSY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-18-0419 NOTICE: This order was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10489405 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1-18-0419 notice: this order was in re estate of lisa r. loessy qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10489405-10489405"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10489418-10489418",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10489418",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Wig",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Second District No. 2-19-0929",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10489418 us pension / defined benefit issues second district no. 2-19-0929 in re marriage of wig qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10489418-10489418"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10490088-10490088",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10490088",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10490088",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-20-1003 NOTICE: This order was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10490088 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1-20-1003 notice: this order was domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10490088-10490088"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10490324-10490324",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10490324",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Salata",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-20-0502 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10490324 us pension / defined benefit issues 2-20-0502 order in re marriage of salata qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10490324-10490324"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10490336-10490336",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10490336",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Folley",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Third District No. 3-18-0427 Rule 23 order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10490336 us pension / defined benefit issues third district no. 3-18-0427 rule 23 order in re marriage of folley qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10490336-10490336"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10490382-10490382",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10490382",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of A'Hearn",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10490382 us pension / defined benefit issues in re marriage of a'hearn qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10490382-10490382"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10490853-10490853",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10490853",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Wehr",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Second District No. 2-20-0726",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10490853 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues second district no. 2-20-0726 domestic relations order in re marriage of wehr qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10490853-10490853"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10491532-10491532",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10491532",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10491532",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10491532 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10491532-10491532"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10494304-10494304",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10494304",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. STEPHEN E. WHITTED",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "815 F. App'x 202",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10494304 us pension / defined benefit issues 815 f. app'x 202 attorney grievance commission of maryland v. stephen e. whitted qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10494304-10494304"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10499144-10499144",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10499144",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Thurston",
      "extracted_docket_number": "57344-0-II The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "445 P.3d 971",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10499144 us pension / defined benefit issues 57344-0-ii the trial 445 p.3d 971 in re marriage of thurston qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10499144-10499144"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10501406-10501406",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10501406",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10501406",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1686 MDA 2023",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10501406 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1686 mda 2023 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10501406-10501406"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10505856-10505856",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10505856",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10505856",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER Appellant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10505856 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues number appellant domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10505856-10505856"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1052106-1052106",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1052106",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ANTHONY JOSEPH ZIOBROWSKI v. MARCY HAYS ZIOBROWSKI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2006-02359-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "902 S.W.2d 918",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1052106 us pension / defined benefit issues m2006-02359-coa-r3-cv - 902 s.w.2d 918 anthony joseph ziobrowski v. marcy hays ziobrowski qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1052106-1052106"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1052107-1052107",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1052107",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ANTHONY JOSEPH ZIOBROWSKI v. MARCY HAYS ZIOBROWSKI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2006-02359-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1052107 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues m2006-02359-coa-r3-cv - domestic relations order anthony joseph ziobrowski v. marcy hays ziobrowski qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1052107-1052107"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1052155-1052155",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1052155",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "WILLIAM EDWARD HARGROVE v. MERRIELLEN HARGROVE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "W2007-00538-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1052155 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues w2007-00538-coa-r3-cv - domestic relations order william edward hargrove v. merriellen hargrove qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1052155-1052155"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1052604-1052604",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1052604",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MARY KAY THOMPSON v. CLAYTON THOMPSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2005-02762-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "879 S.W.2d 856",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1052604 us pension / defined benefit issues m2005-02762-coa-r3-cv - 879 s.w.2d 856 mary kay thompson v. clayton thompson qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1052604-1052604"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1053068-1053068",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1053068",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1053068",
      "extracted_docket_number": "W2005-00038-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "854 S.W.2d 87",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1053068 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues w2005-00038-coa-r3-cv - 854 s.w.2d 87 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1053068-1053068"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1053833-1053833",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1053833",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "TINA M. LUNSFORD v. ROBERT W. LUNSFORD",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2004-00662-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "900 S.W.2d 23",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1053833 us pension / defined benefit issues m2004-00662-coa-r3-cv - 900 s.w.2d 23 tina m. lunsford v. robert w. lunsford qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1053833-1053833"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10547867-10547867",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10547867",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of McCausland",
      "extracted_docket_number": "57522-1-II property. The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "335 P.3d 984",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10547867 us pension / defined benefit issues 57522-1-ii property. the trial 335 p.3d 984 in re marriage of mccausland qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10547867-10547867"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1054856-1054856",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1054856",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "GLORIA J. BEVILL v. ELLIS M. BEVILL",
      "extracted_docket_number": "E2004-00190-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "60 S.W.3d 721",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1054856 us pension / defined benefit issues e2004-00190-coa-r3-cv - 60 s.w.3d 721 gloria j. bevill v. ellis m. bevill qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1054856-1054856"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10555724-10555724",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10555724",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10555724",
      "extracted_docket_number": "589",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10555724 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 589 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10555724-10555724"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1055810-1055810",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1055810",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "STEVEN D. ELLIOTT v. GINGER W. ELLIOTT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2003-00492-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "950 S.W.2d 956",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1055810 us pension / defined benefit issues m2003-00492-coa-r3-cv - 950 s.w.2d 956 steven d. elliott v. ginger w. elliott qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1055810-1055810"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1055968-1055968",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1055968",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MORGAN SUSANNE FOXX v. STEVEN C. BOLDEN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "60 S.W.3d 721",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1055968 us pension / defined benefit issues 60 s.w.3d 721 morgan susanne foxx v. steven c. bolden qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1055968-1055968"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10564468-10564468",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10564468",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Smid",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "983 N.W.2d 572",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10564468 us erisa / defined contribution issues 983 n.w.2d 572 in re estate of smid qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10564468-10564468"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10564958-10564958",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10564958",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10564958",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10564958 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10564958-10564958"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10565020-10565020",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10565020",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10565020",
      "extracted_docket_number": "sheet was not included in the record. See Baker",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "687 S.W.3d 285",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10565020 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues sheet was not included in the record. see baker 687 s.w.3d 285 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10565020-10565020"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10570766-10570766",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10570766",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10570766",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "921 S.W.2d 944",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10570766 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 921 s.w.2d 944 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10570766-10570766"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10571326-10571326",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10571326",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10571326",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10571326 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10571326-10571326"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1057171-1057171",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1057171",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Mathis",
      "extracted_docket_number": "113496",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1057171 us pension / defined benefit issues 113496 in re marriage of mathis qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1057171-1057171"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10572023-10572023",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10572023",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10572023",
      "extracted_docket_number": "589",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10572023 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 589 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10572023-10572023"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10573146-10573146",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10573146",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10573146",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2023CA00165 4 further violation of this",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10573146 us pension / defined benefit issues 2023ca00165 4 further violation of this qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10573146-10573146"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1057546-1057546",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1057546",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of CHINYE UWECHUE-",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "160 Cal.App.4th 574",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1057546 us pension / defined benefit issues 160 cal.app.4th 574 in re marriage of chinye uwechue- qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1057546-1057546"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10575943-10575943",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10575943",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10575943",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2019AP1200 Cir. Ct. No. 1991FA915107 STATE OF WISCONSIN IN",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "830 N.W.2d 647",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10575943 us pension / defined benefit issues 2019ap1200 cir. ct. no. 1991fa915107 state of wisconsin in 830 n.w.2d 647 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10575943-10575943"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10577167-10577167",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10577167",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10577167",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2020AP2114-FT Cir. Ct. No. 2019FA162 STATE OF WISCONSIN IN",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "741 N.W.2d 256",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10577167 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2020ap2114-ft cir. ct. no. 2019fa162 state of wisconsin in 741 n.w.2d 256 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10577167-10577167"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10577699-10577699",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10577699",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10577699",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2022AP523 Cir. Ct. No. 2020FA676 STATE OF WISCONSIN IN",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "768 N.W.2d 641",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10577699 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2022ap523 cir. ct. no. 2020fa676 state of wisconsin in 768 n.w.2d 641 qualified_domestic_relations_order alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10577699-10577699"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10578537-10578537",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10578537",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10578537",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2023AP21 Cir. Ct. No. 2021FA149 STATE OF WISCONSIN IN",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "634 N.W.2d 852",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10578537 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2023ap21 cir. ct. no. 2021fa149 state of wisconsin in 634 n.w.2d 852 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10578537-10578537"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10580864-10580864",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10580864",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DOC-ADS v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE MEMORANDUM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "994 F.3d 1020",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10580864 us erisa / defined contribution issues 994 f.3d 1020 doc-ads v. metropolitan life insurance memorandum qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10580864-10580864"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10593929-10593929",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10593929",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10593929",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2014-000864 ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10593929 us pension / defined benefit issues 2014-000864 on writ of certiorari to the qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10593929-10593929"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10596913-10596913",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10596913",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10596913",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1187 MDA 2023",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10596913 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1187 mda 2023 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10596913-10596913"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10598038-10598038",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10598038",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re MARRIAGE OF HUSSAIN SALBI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-24-0322 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10598038 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2-24-0322 order in re marriage of hussain salbi qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10598038-10598038"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10598423-10598423",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10598423",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ERNEST J. NEDDER v. LAUREN E. NEDDER",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10598423 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order ernest j. nedder v. lauren e. nedder qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10598423-10598423"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10601667-10601667",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10601667",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10601667",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10601667 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10601667-10601667"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10602177-10602177",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10602177",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10602177",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10602177 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10602177-10602177"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10602185-10602185",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10602185",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10602185",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10602185 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10602185-10602185"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1060435-1060435",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1060435",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "RICHARD THOMAS BOGAN v. DORIS MAE BOGAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "E1998-00060-SC-R11-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "772 S.W.2d 48",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1060435 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues e1998-00060-sc-r11-cv - 772 s.w.2d 48 richard thomas bogan v. doris mae bogan qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1060435-1060435"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1061085-1061085",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1061085",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1061085",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1061085 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1061085-1061085"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1061165-1061165",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1061165",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1061165",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of the court to monitor Husband",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1061165 us pension / defined benefit issues of the court to monitor husband qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1061165-1061165"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1061209-1061209",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1061209",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1061209",
      "extracted_docket_number": "in order to make the terms of the retirement or pen",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1061209 us pension / defined benefit issues in order to make the terms of the retirement or pen qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1061209-1061209"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10614111-10614111",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10614111",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10614111",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2011-186667",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10614111 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2011-186667 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10614111-10614111"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1061765-1061765",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1061765",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "L.P. v. PRC",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1061765 us pension / defined benefit issues l.p. v. prc qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1061765-1061765"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10617652-10617652",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10617652",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10617652",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2016-001265",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10617652 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2016-001265 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10617652-10617652"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10617842-10617842",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10617842",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10617842",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2016-002169",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10617842 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2016-002169 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10617842-10617842"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1061808-1061808",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1061808",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Rife",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "555 U.S. 285",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1061808 us pension / defined benefit issues 555 u.s. 285 in re marriage of rife qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1061808-1061808"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10619558-10619558",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10619558",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10619558",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2021-000110",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10619558 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2021-000110 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10619558-10619558"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1061958-1061958",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1061958",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1061958",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "165 S.W.3d 322",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1061958 us pension / defined benefit issues 165 s.w.3d 322 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1061958-1061958"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1062143-1062143",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1062143",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1062143",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1062143 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1062143-1062143"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1062296-1062296",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1062296",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1062296",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1062296 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1062296-1062296"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1062363-1062363",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1062363",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1062363",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1062363 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1062363-1062363"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1062530-1062530",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1062530",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1062530",
      "extracted_docket_number": "for entry of the appropriate QDROs. The parties the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1062530 us pension / defined benefit issues for entry of the appropriate qdros. the parties the qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1062530-1062530"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1062571-1062571",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1062571",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1062571",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1062571 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1062571-1062571"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1062677-1062677",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1062677",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1062677",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1062677 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1062677-1062677"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10626862-10626862",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10626862",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10626862",
      "extracted_docket_number": "50446 CHRIS D. FARNSWORTH",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "303 P.3d 214",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10626862 us pension / defined benefit issues 50446 chris d. farnsworth 303 p.3d 214 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10626862-10626862"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1062747-1062747",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1062747",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1062747",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1062747 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1062747-1062747"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1063116-1063116",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1063116",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1063116",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years that the spouse was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1063116 us pension / defined benefit issues of years that the spouse was qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1063116-1063116"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1063237-1063237",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1063237",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1063237",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1063237 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1063237-1063237"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1063321-1063321",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1063321",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1063321",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1063321 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1063321-1063321"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1063366-1063366",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1063366",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1063366",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years that the spouse was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1063366 us pension / defined benefit issues of years that the spouse was qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1063366-1063366"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1064033-1064033",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1064033",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "M.E.D. v. J.P.M",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1064033 us pension / defined benefit issues m.e.d. v. j.p.m qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1064033-1064033"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1064474-1064474",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1064474",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1064474",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1064474 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1064474-1064474"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10645008-10645008",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10645008",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of Brown",
      "extracted_docket_number": "31-4. No notice of",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10645008 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 31-4. no notice of domestic relations order in re the marriage of brown qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10645008-10645008"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1064891-1064891",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1064891",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1064891",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years that the spouse was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1064891 us pension / defined benefit issues of years that the spouse was qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1064891-1064891"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10649934-10649934",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10649934",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10649934",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "396 F.3d 96",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10649934 us erisa / defined contribution issues 396 f.3d 96 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10649934-10649934"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10649957-10649957",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10649957",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10649957",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "396 F.3d 96",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10649957 us erisa / defined contribution issues 396 f.3d 96 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10649957-10649957"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1065036-1065036",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1065036",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "KAREN THOMPSON SCOGGINS v. LARRY BROWDER SCOGGINS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "60 S.W.3d 721",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1065036 us pension / defined benefit issues 60 s.w.3d 721 karen thompson scoggins v. larry browder scoggins qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1065036-1065036"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10654013-10654013",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10654013",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10654013",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "429 U.S. 97",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10654013 us pension / defined benefit issues 429 u.s. 97 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10654013-10654013"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10654121-10654121",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10654121",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "LLC v. NTE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10654121 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order llc v. nte qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10654121-10654121"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1065501-1065501",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1065501",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1065501",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "422 U.S. 806",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1065501 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 422 u.s. 806 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1065501-1065501"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10655957-10655957",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10655957",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10655957",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "641 F.3d 560",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10655957 us pension / defined benefit issues 641 f.3d 560 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10655957-10655957"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10656657-10656657",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10656657",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10656657",
      "extracted_docket_number": "indicating the date upon which it was mailed to Pla",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10656657 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues indicating the date upon which it was mailed to pla domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10656657-10656657"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1065765-1065765",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1065765",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "L.L.C. v. NCP",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1065765 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order l.l.c. v. ncp qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1065765-1065765"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1065830-1065830",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1065830",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1065830",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1065830 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1065830-1065830"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1065849-1065849",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1065849",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1065849",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1065849 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1065849-1065849"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1065957-1065957",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1065957",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1065957",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of this Court for entry of appropriate Qualified Do",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1065957 us pension / defined benefit issues of this court for entry of appropriate qualified do qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1065957-1065957"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1065966-1065966",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1065966",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1065966",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years that the spouse was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1065966 us pension / defined benefit issues of years that the spouse was qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1065966-1065966"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1066005-1066005",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1066005",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "L.L.C. v. NCP",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1066005 us pension / defined benefit issues l.l.c. v. ncp qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1066005-1066005"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10660972-10660972",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10660972",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10660972",
      "extracted_docket_number": "consistent with this Memorandum and Order. I. Backg",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "298 F.3d 156",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10660972 us pension / defined benefit issues consistent with this memorandum and order. i. backg 298 f.3d 156 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10660972-10660972"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1066209-1066209",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1066209",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1066209",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1797-98-1 DIANE HARRIS RAGSDALE FROM THE CIRCUIT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "486 U.S. 330",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1066209 us pension / defined benefit issues 1797-98-1 diane harris ragsdale from the circuit 486 u.s. 330 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1066209-1066209"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1066234-1066234",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1066234",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1066234",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1797-98-1 DIANE HARRIS RAGSDALE FROM THE CIRCUIT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "486 U.S. 330",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1066234 us pension / defined benefit issues 1797-98-1 diane harris ragsdale from the circuit 486 u.s. 330 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1066234-1066234"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1066315-1066315",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1066315",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1066315",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1066315 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1066315-1066315"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1066770-1066770",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1066770",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1066770",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1066770 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1066770-1066770"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10668307-10668307",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10668307",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ELECTRONICALLY FILED v. HUB PARKING TECHNOLOGY USA",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10668307 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order electronically filed v. hub parking technology usa qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10668307-10668307"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1066988-1066988",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1066988",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1066988",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1066988 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1066988-1066988"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1066991-1066991",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1066991",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ALICE KAYE BEASON v. C.A. BEASON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "E2002-01425-COA-R3-CV These",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1066991 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues e2002-01425-coa-r3-cv these domestic relations order alice kaye beason v. c.a. beason qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1066991-1066991"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1067123-1067123",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1067123",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1067123",
      "extracted_docket_number": "for the filing of the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1067123 us pension / defined benefit issues for the filing of the qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1067123-1067123"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1067269-1067269",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1067269",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1067269",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1067269 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1067269-1067269"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1067283-1067283",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1067283",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1067283",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1067283 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1067283-1067283"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10675548-10675548",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10675548",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10675548",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Entry No. 20-1",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "920 F.3d 278",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10675548 us pension / defined benefit issues entry no. 20-1 920 f.3d 278 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10675548-10675548"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1067569-1067569",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1067569",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1067569",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1067569 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1067569-1067569"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10676175-10676175",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10676175",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10676175",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "283 F.3d 436",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10676175 us erisa / defined contribution issues 283 f.3d 436 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10676175-10676175"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10676650-10676650",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10676650",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10676650",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-1. MetLife again",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "925 F.2d 866",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10676650 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1-1. metlife again 925 f.2d 866 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10676650-10676650"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10677062-10677062",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10677062",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10677062",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Entry No. 1",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10677062 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues entry no. 1 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10677062-10677062"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10679660-10679660",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10679660",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10679660",
      "extracted_docket_number": "and RETURN it to the docket of the Honorable Lee Ye",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "281 F.3d 158",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10679660 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues and return it to the docket of the honorable lee ye 281 f.3d 158 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10679660-10679660"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1067998-1067998",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1067998",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1067998",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1067998 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1067998-1067998"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1068276-1068276",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1068276",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DEBORAH BOWERS SMITH v. RILEY DEAN SMITH A",
      "extracted_docket_number": "W2002-00477-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "954 S.W.2d 730",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1068276 us pension / defined benefit issues w2002-00477-coa-r3-cv - 954 s.w.2d 730 deborah bowers smith v. riley dean smith a qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1068276-1068276"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1068685-1068685",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1068685",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "FLOYD MICHAEL WOODY v. JOY DARLENE WOODY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "E2001-02078-COA-R3-CV In this case from the Chancery",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1068685 us pension / defined benefit issues e2001-02078-coa-r3-cv in this case from the chancery floyd michael woody v. joy darlene woody qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1068685-1068685"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1068819-1068819",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1068819",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "TERRY B. HARDIN v. TERESA DIANE HARDIN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2001-01845-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 S.W.2d 823",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1068819 us pension / defined benefit issues m2001-01845-coa-r3-cv - 937 s.w.2d 823 terry b. hardin v. teresa diane hardin qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1068819-1068819"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10688243-10688243",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10688243",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10688243",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "394 F.3d 213",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10688243 us pension / defined benefit issues 394 f.3d 213 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10688243-10688243"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1069501-1069501",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1069501",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1069501",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1069501 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1069501-1069501"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10701570-10701570",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10701570",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ORDER REGARDING v. DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO",
      "extracted_docket_number": "generated by the 22",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "554 U.S. 105",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10701570 us pension / defined benefit issues generated by the 22 554 u.s. 105 order regarding v. defendant's motion to qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10701570-10701570"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10704515-10704515",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10704515",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10704515",
      "extracted_docket_number": "and page numbers applied by the Court",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10704515 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues and page numbers applied by the court domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10704515-10704515"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1070670-1070670",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1070670",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "THOMAS R. STUBBLEFIELD v. MONIQUE RUTH STUBBLEFIELD",
      "extracted_docket_number": "E2001-01433-COA-R3-CV Husband",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "954 S.W.2d 730",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1070670 us pension / defined benefit issues e2001-01433-coa-r3-cv husband 954 s.w.2d 730 thomas r. stubblefield v. monique ruth stubblefield qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1070670-1070670"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1070746-1070746",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1070746",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MICHAEL DANIEL FRY v. YURIKO SHINODA FRY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2000-02969-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 S.W.2d 823",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1070746 us pension / defined benefit issues m2000-02969-coa-r3-cv - 937 s.w.2d 823 michael daniel fry v. yuriko shinoda fry qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1070746-1070746"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1071373-1071373",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1071373",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "EILEEN WILSON DUNLOY v. BRIAN EDWARD DUNLOY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2000-03103-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 S.W.2d 823",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1071373 us pension / defined benefit issues m2000-03103-coa-r3-cv - 937 s.w.2d 823 eileen wilson dunloy v. brian edward dunloy qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1071373-1071373"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1072378-1072378",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1072378",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DANIEL ED LOWE v. FAYTELLA D. LOWE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "932 S.W.2d 939",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1072378 us pension / defined benefit issues 932 s.w.2d 939 daniel ed lowe v. faytella d. lowe qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1072378-1072378"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10728965-10728965",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10728965",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10728965",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "588 F.3d 186",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10728965 us pension / defined benefit issues 588 f.3d 186 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10728965-10728965"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10729266-10729266",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10729266",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10729266",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of this Court. 13 The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to se",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "526 U.S. 541",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10729266 us pension / defined benefit issues of this court. 13 the court directs the clerk to se 526 u.s. 541 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10729266-10729266"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10731094-10731094",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10731094",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10731094",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "825 F.3d 206",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10731094 us pension / defined benefit issues 825 f.3d 206 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10731094-10731094"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10732269-10732269",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10732269",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10732269",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "207 F.3d 1143",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10732269 us pension / defined benefit issues 207 f.3d 1143 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10732269-10732269"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1073522-1073522",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1073522",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "PHILLIPS v. THOMAS HICKMAN PHILLIPS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M1999-00212-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 S.W.2d 815",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1073522 us pension / defined benefit issues m1999-00212-coa-r3-cv - 937 s.w.2d 815 phillips v. thomas hickman phillips qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1073522-1073522"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10737117-10737117",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10737117",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10737117",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20230742-CA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "359 P.3d 667",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10737117 us pension / defined benefit issues 20230742-ca 359 p.3d 667 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10737117-10737117"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10737620-10737620",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10737620",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10737620",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10737620 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10737620-10737620"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10738069-10738069",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10738069",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10738069",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10738069 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10738069-10738069"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10739109-10739109",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10739109",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of DOMINIC and BIBIAN EHIRIM. DOMINIC EHIRIM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10739109 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re the marriage of dominic and bibian ehirim. dominic ehirim qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10739109-10739109"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10742931-10742931",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10742931",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10742931",
      "extracted_docket_number": "WD-23-036 nka Margaret A. Korfhage Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "559 N.E.2d 1292",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10742931 us pension / defined benefit issues wd-23-036 nka margaret a. korfhage trial 559 n.e.2d 1292 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10742931-10742931"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10745149-10745149",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10745149",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10745149",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10745149 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10745149-10745149"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10745938-10745938",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10745938",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10745938",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1055 MDA 2020",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "167 A.3d 127",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10745938 us pension / defined benefit issues 1055 mda 2020 167 a.3d 127 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10745938-10745938"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10746314-10746314",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10746314",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10746314",
      "extracted_docket_number": "562 WDA 2020",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "580 A.2d 369",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10746314 us pension / defined benefit issues 562 wda 2020 580 a.2d 369 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10746314-10746314"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10746599-10746599",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10746599",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10746599",
      "extracted_docket_number": "835 EDA 2020",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10746599 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 835 eda 2020 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10746599-10746599"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10746719-10746719",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10746719",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10746719",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1203 EDA 2020",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "799 A.2d 812",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10746719 us pension / defined benefit issues 1203 eda 2020 799 a.2d 812 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10746719-10746719"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10746999-10746999",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10746999",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10746999",
      "extracted_docket_number": "209 MDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "916 A.2d 1128",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10746999 us pension / defined benefit issues 209 mda 2021 916 a.2d 1128 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10746999-10746999"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1074970-1074970",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1074970",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1074970",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16910-C",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "565 S.W.2d 876",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1074970 us erisa / defined contribution issues 16910-c 565 s.w.2d 876 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1074970-1074970"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10751393-10751393",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10751393",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COLUMBUS BAR ASSOCIATION v. RYAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10751393 us erisa / defined contribution issues columbus bar association v. ryan qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10751393-10751393"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1075230-1075230",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1075230",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1075230",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1075230 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1075230-1075230"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10752773-10752773",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10752773",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10752773",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24CA012069 Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10752773 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 24ca012069 appellee v domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10752773-10752773"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10753069-10753069",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10753069",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10753069",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "651 F.3d 715",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10753069 us erisa / defined contribution issues 651 f.3d 715 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10753069-10753069"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10754408-10754408",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10754408",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JEFFERY ALAN MAU AND ANN MARIE MAU Upon the Petition of JEFFERY ALAN MAU",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24-0100",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10754408 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 24-0100 domestic relations order in re the marriage of jeffery alan mau and ann marie mau upon the petition of jeffery alan mau qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10754408-10754408"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10755277-10755277",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10755277",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "STALLINGS v. STALLINGS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 24-0237 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10755277 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 24-0237 fc domestic relations order stallings v. stallings qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10755277-10755277"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1076169-1076169",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1076169",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1076169",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1076169 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1076169-1076169"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10762979-10762979",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10762979",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Preston",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24A-DN-716",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "15 N.E.3d 108",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10762979 us pension / defined benefit issues 24a-dn-716 15 n.e.3d 108 in re marriage of preston qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10762979-10762979"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10763079-10763079",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10763079",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Morgan",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-23-1923 NOTICE: This order was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10763079 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1-23-1923 notice: this order was domestic relations order in re marriage of morgan qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10763079-10763079"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1076460-1076460",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1076460",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1076460",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "748 S.W.2d 424",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1076460 us pension / defined benefit issues 748 s.w.2d 424 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1076460-1076460"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1076772-1076772",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1076772",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1076772",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1076772 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1076772-1076772"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10776130-10776130",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10776130",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10776130",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10776130 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10776130-10776130"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10776214-10776214",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10776214",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10776214",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1161 WDA 2020",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "889 A.2d 1251",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10776214 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1161 wda 2020 889 a.2d 1251 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10776214-10776214"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10776873-10776873",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10776873",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of McCausland",
      "extracted_docket_number": "57522-1-II property. The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "335 P.3d 984",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10776873 us pension / defined benefit issues 57522-1-ii property. the trial 335 p.3d 984 in re marriage of mccausland qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10776873-10776873"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10777836-10777836",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10777836",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10777836",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10777836 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10777836-10777836"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10780794-10780794",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10780794",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "AFTUCK v. AFTUCK. HODGES",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10780794 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues aftuck v. aftuck. hodges qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10780794-10780794"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10781865-10781865",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10781865",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10781865",
      "extracted_docket_number": "32 EDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "647 F.3d 221",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10781865 us pension / defined benefit issues 32 eda 2019 647 f.3d 221 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10781865-10781865"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10781926-10781926",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10781926",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10781926",
      "extracted_docket_number": "208 EDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "633 A.2d 589",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10781926 us pension / defined benefit issues 208 eda 2019 633 a.2d 589 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10781926-10781926"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10781956-10781956",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10781956",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10781956",
      "extracted_docket_number": "180 EDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10781956 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 180 eda 2019 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10781956-10781956"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10783480-10783480",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10783480",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10783480",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20230789-CA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "552 P.3d 235",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10783480 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20230789-ca 552 p.3d 235 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10783480-10783480"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10784062-10784062",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10784062",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10784062",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1686 MDA 2023",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10784062 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1686 mda 2023 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10784062-10784062"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10786491-10786491",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10786491",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of Charles R. Hook",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24CA0459 City and County of Denver District",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10786491 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 24ca0459 city and county of denver district domestic relations order in re the marriage of charles r. hook qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10786491-10786491"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10787754-10787754",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10787754",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DIVISION ONE v. UNPUBLISHED OPINION WALKER LOGAN HAGIUS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "86293-6-I/2 Henery",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "232 P.3d 573",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10787754 us erisa / defined contribution issues 86293-6-i/2 henery 232 p.3d 573 division one v. unpublished opinion walker logan hagius qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10787754-10787754"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10788744-10788744",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10788744",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "KANE v. KANE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 23-0595 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10788744 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 23-0595 fc kane v. kane qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10788744-10788744"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1079021-1079021",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1079021",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1079021",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "672 S.W.2d 765",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1079021 us pension / defined benefit issues 672 s.w.2d 765 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1079021-1079021"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10791304-10791304",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10791304",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of David J. Homoki",
      "extracted_docket_number": "22CA2069 Arapahoe County District",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "252 P.3d 1182",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10791304 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 22ca2069 arapahoe county district 252 p.3d 1182 in re the marriage of david j. homoki qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10791304-10791304"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10794476-10794476",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10794476",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10794476",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Entry",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "144 S.Ct. 1392",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10794476 us pension / defined benefit issues entry 144 s.ct. 1392 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10794476-10794476"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10795731-10795731",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10795731",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR LINDA WHITE HESTER APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE DERWIN L. WEBB",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2024-CA-0484-MR LINDA WHITE HESTER APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "807 S.W.2d 476",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10795731 us pension / defined benefit issues 2024-ca-0484-mr linda white hester appellant 807 s.w.2d 476 mr linda white hester appellant appeal from jefferson circuit court v. honorable derwin l. webb qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10795731-10795731"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10799210-10799210",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10799210",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "HOWIE v. HOWIE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 23-0587 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 P.3d 931",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10799210 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 23-0587 fc 545 p.3d 931 howie v. howie qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10799210-10799210"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10801081-10801081",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10801081",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Scaletta",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-24-155",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "880 N.W.2d 43",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10801081 us erisa / defined contribution issues a-24-155 880 n.w.2d 43 in re estate of scaletta qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10801081-10801081"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10801321-10801321",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10801321",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Arugonda",
      "extracted_docket_number": "84401-6-I/2 the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "108 P.3d 779",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10801321 us erisa / defined contribution issues 84401-6-i/2 the 108 p.3d 779 in re marriage of arugonda qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10801321-10801321"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10802945-10802945",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10802945",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10802945",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER Appellant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10802945 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues number appellant domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10802945-10802945"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10804406-10804406",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10804406",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10804406",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "809 F.2d 626",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10804406 us pension / defined benefit issues 809 f.2d 626 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10804406-10804406"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10804904-10804904",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10804904",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MICHAEL EDWARD BIRDWELL v. TAMMY ANN O'DELL",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "637 S.W.2d 456",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10804904 us pension / defined benefit issues 637 s.w.2d 456 personal representative of the estate of michael edward birdwell v. tammy ann o'dell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10804904-10804904"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10805735-10805735",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10805735",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10805735",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER Appellant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10805735 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues number appellant domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10805735-10805735"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10806016-10806016",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10806016",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10806016",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of deficiencies",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10806016 us erisa / defined contribution issues of deficiencies qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10806016-10806016"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10806032-10806032",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10806032",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10806032",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of courts have joined Casse in recognizing the bankruptcy",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "198 F.3d 327",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10806032 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues of courts have joined casse in recognizing the bankruptcy 198 f.3d 327 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10806032-10806032"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10806050-10806050",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10806050",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10806050",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of courts have joined Casse in recognizing the bankruptcy",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "198 F.3d 327",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10806050 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues of courts have joined casse in recognizing the bankruptcy 198 f.3d 327 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10806050-10806050"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10806735-10806735",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10806735",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10806735",
      "extracted_docket_number": "AP 00-009 sep 7 2000 Fem",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "748 A.2d 996",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10806735 us pension / defined benefit issues ap 00-009 sep 7 2000 fem 748 a.2d 996 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10806735-10806735"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1080819-1080819",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1080819",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1080819",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "897 S.W.2d 702",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1080819 us pension / defined benefit issues 897 s.w.2d 702 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1080819-1080819"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1080869-1080869",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1080869",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1080869",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "900 S.W.2d 23",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1080869 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 900 s.w.2d 23 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1080869-1080869"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1081106-1081106",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1081106",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1081106",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of factors for the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "909 S.W.2d 408",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1081106 us pension / defined benefit issues of factors for the 909 s.w.2d 408 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1081106-1081106"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10813440-10813440",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10813440",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10813440",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24A-DN-1174",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "121 N.E.3d 564",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10813440 us pension / defined benefit issues 24a-dn-1174 121 n.e.3d 564 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10813440-10813440"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10814400-10814400",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10814400",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10814400",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10814400 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10814400-10814400"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1081611-1081611",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1081611",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1081611",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1081611 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1081611-1081611"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10819704-10819704",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10819704",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10819704",
      "extracted_docket_number": "7-24-09 First Assignment of Error The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10819704 us pension / defined benefit issues 7-24-09 first assignment of error the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10819704-10819704"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10823518-10823518",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10823518",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR KAREN RODRIGUEZ APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE DENISE D. BROWN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2023-CA-1294-MR KAREN RODRIGUEZ APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "707 S.W.2d 794",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10823518 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2023-ca-1294-mr karen rodriguez appellant 707 s.w.2d 794 mr karen rodriguez appellant appeal from jefferson circuit court v. honorable denise d. brown qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10823518-10823518"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10824232-10824232",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10824232",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10824232",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "773 N.E.2d 516",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10824232 us pension / defined benefit issues 773 n.e.2d 516 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10824232-10824232"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10826127-10826127",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10826127",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10826127",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "980 F.3d 231",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10826127 us pension / defined benefit issues 980 f.3d 231 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10826127-10826127"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10829349-10829349",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10829349",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of MELISSA and RYAN HOSMAN. MELISSA SMITH",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "21 Cal.3d 779",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10829349 us pension / defined benefit issues 21 cal.3d 779 in re the marriage of melissa and ryan hosman. melissa smith qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10829349-10829349"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10829443-10829443",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10829443",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10829443",
      "extracted_docket_number": "notes from the judge who presided over the divorce",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "military_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10829443 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues notes from the judge who presided over the divorce domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k military_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10829443-10829443"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10830111-10830111",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10830111",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SCOTT v. SCOTT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 24-0698 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10830111 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 24-0698 fc scott v. scott qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10830111-10830111"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10831125-10831125",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10831125",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10831125",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10831125 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10831125-10831125"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10833355-10833355",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10833355",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10833355",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10833355 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10833355-10833355"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10834674-10834674",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10834674",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR MI HUI CHON SALYER APPELLANT APPEAL FROM BOYD CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE GEORGE DAVIS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2024-CA-0623-MR MI HUI CHON SALYER APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "495 S.W.2d 175",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10834674 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2024-ca-0623-mr mi hui chon salyer appellant 495 s.w.2d 175 mr mi hui chon salyer appellant appeal from boyd circuit court v. honorable george davis qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10834674-10834674"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10839571-10839571",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10839571",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of ROD ALAN and HUB ALAN FREEMAN. ROD ALAN FREEMAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "103 Cal.App.4th 1409",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10839571 us pension / defined benefit issues 103 cal.app.4th 1409 in re marriage of rod alan and hub alan freeman. rod alan freeman qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10839571-10839571"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10842842-10842842",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10842842",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JJ. YOLANDA M. CURRIER v. JAMES M. CURRIER LAWRENCE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "number FM-2017-130 FOR CLERK REFERENCE ONLY",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "227 A.3d 159",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10842842 us erisa / defined contribution issues number fm-2017-130 for clerk reference only 227 a.3d 159 jj. yolanda m. currier v. james m. currier lawrence qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10842842-10842842"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10843388-10843388",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10843388",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10843388",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10843388 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10843388-10843388"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10846358-10846358",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10846358",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10846358",
      "extracted_docket_number": "12 at 15-22. The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "337 A.2d 559",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10846358 us pension / defined benefit issues 12 at 15-22. the trial 337 a.2d 559 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10846358-10846358"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10847895-10847895",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10847895",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Butler",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "28 Cal.3d 366",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10847895 us pension / defined benefit issues 28 cal.3d 366 in re marriage of butler qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10847895-10847895"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10851057-10851057",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10851057",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of CHRISTINA DeBENEDETTI and MORGAN ENSBURG",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "106 Cal.App.4th 754",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10851057 us pension / defined benefit issues 106 cal.app.4th 754 in re the marriage of christina debenedetti and morgan ensburg qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10851057-10851057"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1085120-1085120",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1085120",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SIDERS v. OPM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "407 F.3d 1309",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1085120 us pension / defined benefit issues 407 f.3d 1309 siders v. opm qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1085120-1085120"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1086764-1086764",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1086764",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1086764",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2012-01338-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "78 S.W.3d 291",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1086764 us pension / defined benefit issues m2012-01338-coa-r3-cv - 78 s.w.3d 291 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1086764-1086764"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10874341-10874341",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10874341",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10874341",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 which was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10874341 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 which was qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10874341-10874341"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10887006-10887006",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10887006",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10887006",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10887006 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10887006-10887006"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10887761-10887761",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10887761",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COA JANICE LODEN SULLIVAN APPELLANT v. JAMES WAYNE SULLIVAN APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10887761 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues coa janice loden sullivan appellant v. james wayne sullivan appellee date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10887761-10887761"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10920316-10920316",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10920316",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10920316",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10920316 us pension / defined benefit issues 477 u.s. 242 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10920316-10920316"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11013086-11013086",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11013086",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11013086",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11013086 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11013086-11013086"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11016649-11016649",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11016649",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "LLC v. NTE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA24-183",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11016649 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues coa24-183 domestic relations order llc v. nte qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11016649-11016649"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11049046-11049046",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11049046",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11049046",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "323 F.3d 32",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11049046 us erisa / defined contribution issues 323 f.3d 32 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11049046-11049046"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11054857-11054857",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11054857",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11054857",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1272 WDA 2024",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "828 A.2d 376",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11054857 us pension / defined benefit issues 1272 wda 2024 828 a.2d 376 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11054857-11054857"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11055831-11055831",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11055831",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11055831",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1272 WDA 2024",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "828 A.2d 376",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11055831 us pension / defined benefit issues 1272 wda 2024 828 a.2d 376 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11055831-11055831"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11060571-11060571",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11060571",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of Yolanda and Damon Williams. YOLANDA WILLIAMS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "97 Cal.App.4th 847",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11060571 us pension / defined benefit issues 97 cal.app.4th 847 in re the marriage of yolanda and damon williams. yolanda williams qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11060571-11060571"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11060618-11060618",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11060618",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "HEATHER MARIE BAILEY v. DANIEL MICHAEL BAILEY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "414 S.W.3d 685",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11060618 us pension / defined benefit issues 414 s.w.3d 685 heather marie bailey v. daniel michael bailey qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11060618-11060618"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11064113-11064113",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11064113",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11064113",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11064113 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11064113-11064113"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11065913-11065913",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11065913",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Vaughn",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "433 S.W.3d 523",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11065913 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 433 s.w.3d 523 in re marriage of vaughn qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11065913-11065913"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11066538-11066538",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11066538",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "KIM DIXON SMITH v. KEVIN JAY SMITH",
      "extracted_docket_number": "03-C-97-009400 REPORTED",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "453 U.S. 210",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11066538 us pension / defined benefit issues 03-c-97-009400 reported 453 u.s. 210 kim dixon smith v. kevin jay smith qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11066538-11066538"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11066615-11066615",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11066615",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11066615",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11066615 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11066615-11066615"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11073671-11073671",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11073671",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11073671",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "385 S.W.3d 337",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11073671 us erisa / defined contribution issues 385 s.w.3d 337 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11073671-11073671"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11073773-11073773",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11073773",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11073773",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11073773 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11073773-11073773"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11074119-11074119",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11074119",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11074119",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11074119 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11074119-11074119"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11076277-11076277",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11076277",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11076277",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "551 S.W.3d 394",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11076277 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 551 s.w.3d 394 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11076277-11076277"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11076318-11076318",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11076318",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11076318",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "479 S.W.3d 56",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11076318 us pension / defined benefit issues 479 s.w.3d 56 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11076318-11076318"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11077606-11077606",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11077606",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11077606",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "257 S.W.3d 864",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11077606 us pension / defined benefit issues 257 s.w.3d 864 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11077606-11077606"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11077819-11077819",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11077819",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11077819",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11077819 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11077819-11077819"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11079132-11079132",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11079132",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11079132",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "216 So.3d 130",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11079132 us erisa / defined contribution issues 216 so.3d 130 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11079132-11079132"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11079974-11079974",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11079974",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11079974",
      "extracted_docket_number": "No. 1",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 F. Supp. 2d 1048",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11079974 us erisa / defined contribution issues no. 1 937 f. supp. 2d 1048 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11079974-11079974"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11080316-11080316",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11080316",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COLUMBUS BAR ASSOCIATION v. RYAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11080316 us erisa / defined contribution issues columbus bar association v. ryan qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11080316-11080316"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11085334-11085334",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11085334",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "KIM DIXON SMITH v. KEVIN JAY SMITH",
      "extracted_docket_number": "03-C-97-009400 REPORTED",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "453 U.S. 210",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11085334 us pension / defined benefit issues 03-c-97-009400 reported 453 u.s. 210 kim dixon smith v. kevin jay smith qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11085334-11085334"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11089246-11089246",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11089246",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11089246",
      "extracted_docket_number": "30331 Appellee : : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11089246 us pension / defined benefit issues 30331 appellee : : trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11089246-11089246"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11093474-11093474",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11093474",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Alarcon",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11093474 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of alarcon qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11093474-11093474"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11095195-11095195",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11095195",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COA THOMAS KEVIN BRASWELL APPELLANT v. LADONNA JO BRASWELL APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "791 So.2d 220",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11095195 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 791 so.2d 220 coa thomas kevin braswell appellant v. ladonna jo braswell appellee date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11095195-11095195"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11096166-11096166",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11096166",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CROSS-APPELLEE v. ALISON HOLLISTER OSING APPELLEE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of a different chancellor. Following a hearing on J",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11096166 us pension / defined benefit issues of a different chancellor. following a hearing on j cross-appellee v. alison hollister osing appellee qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11096166-11096166"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11096720-11096720",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11096720",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11096720",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "290 S.W.3d 748",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11096720 us pension / defined benefit issues 290 s.w.3d 748 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11096720-11096720"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11097676-11097676",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11097676",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11097676",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "608 S.W.2d 405",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11097676 us pension / defined benefit issues 608 s.w.2d 405 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11097676-11097676"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11097814-11097814",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11097814",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hatch",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11097814 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order in re marriage of hatch qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11097814-11097814"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11099190-11099190",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11099190",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Petelle",
      "extracted_docket_number": "87370-9-I/4 The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "386 F.3d 1306",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11099190 us pension / defined benefit issues 87370-9-i/4 the trial 386 f.3d 1306 in re estate of petelle qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11099190-11099190"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11101067-11101067",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11101067",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11101067",
      "extracted_docket_number": "51857 IDAHO STATE BAR",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "522 P.3d 1236",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11101067 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 51857 idaho state bar 522 p.3d 1236 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11101067-11101067"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102129-11102129",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102129",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102129",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "444 P.3d 165",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102129 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 444 p.3d 165 qualified_domestic_relations_order alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102129-11102129"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102146-11102146",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102146",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102146",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102146 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102146-11102146"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102162-11102162",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102162",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102162",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102162 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102162-11102162"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102172-11102172",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102172",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102172",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "444 P.3d 180",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102172 us pension / defined benefit issues 444 p.3d 180 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102172-11102172"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102220-11102220",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102220",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102220",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "158 P.3d 817",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102220 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 158 p.3d 817 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102220-11102220"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102308-11102308",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102308",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102308",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "244 P.3d 1121",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102308 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 244 p.3d 1121 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102308-11102308"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102472-11102472",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102472",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102472",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "205 P.3d 342",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102472 us pension / defined benefit issues 205 p.3d 342 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102472-11102472"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102504-11102504",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102504",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102504",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102504 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102504-11102504"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102583-11102583",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102583",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102583",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "319 P.3d 219",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102583 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 319 p.3d 219 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102583-11102583"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102712-11102712",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102712",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "J.F.E. v. J.A.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "56 P.3d 9",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102712 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 56 p.3d 9 j.f.e. v. j.a.s qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102712-11102712"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102737-11102737",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102737",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102737",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "240 P.3d 1225",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102737 us pension / defined benefit issues 240 p.3d 1225 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102737-11102737"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11102740-11102740",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11102740",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11102740",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "288 P.3d 1289",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11102740 us pension / defined benefit issues 288 p.3d 1289 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11102740-11102740"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11105234-11105234",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11105234",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "LLC v. THF",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1094 MDA 2024",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11105234 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1094 mda 2024 domestic relations order llc v. thf qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11105234-11105234"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11112240-11112240",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11112240",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11112240",
      "extracted_docket_number": "368917 Lenawee Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11112240 us pension / defined benefit issues 368917 lenawee circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11112240-11112240"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11113719-11113719",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11113719",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of KELLEY and BRUCE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "79 Cal.App.5th 283",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11113719 us erisa / defined contribution issues 79 cal.app.5th 283 in re the marriage of kelley and bruce qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11113719-11113719"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11114585-11114585",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11114585",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11114585",
      "extracted_docket_number": "993 MDA 2024",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "108 A.3d 913",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11114585 us pension / defined benefit issues 993 mda 2024 108 a.3d 913 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11114585-11114585"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11115608-11115608",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11115608",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11115608",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11115608 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11115608-11115608"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11116367-11116367",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11116367",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of IVONNE G. and ARMANDO E. NAVARRO",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "66 Cal.App.5th 583",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11116367 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 66 cal.app.5th 583 in re the marriage of ivonne g. and armando e. navarro qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11116367-11116367"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11116418-11116418",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11116418",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11116418",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24A-DN-580",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "849 N.E.2d 773",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11116418 us pension / defined benefit issues 24a-dn-580 849 n.e.2d 773 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11116418-11116418"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11117065-11117065",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11117065",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11117065",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "189 P.3d 1056",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11117065 us pension / defined benefit issues 189 p.3d 1056 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11117065-11117065"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11120317-11120317",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11120317",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11120317",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "556 U.S. 662",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11120317 us pension / defined benefit issues 556 u.s. 662 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11120317-11120317"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11124146-11124146",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11124146",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Johns",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4-24-1115 This Order was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11124146 us pension / defined benefit issues 4-24-1115 this order was in re marriage of johns qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11124146-11124146"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11124207-11124207",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11124207",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11124207",
      "extracted_docket_number": "07-25-00006-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "624 S.W.3d 199",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11124207 us erisa / defined contribution issues 07-25-00006-cv 624 s.w.3d 199 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11124207-11124207"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11127632-11127632",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11127632",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11127632",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2023AP1967 Cir. Ct. No. 2017FA1317 STATE OF WISCONSIN IN",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "664 N.W.2d 641",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11127632 us pension / defined benefit issues 2023ap1967 cir. ct. no. 2017fa1317 state of wisconsin in 664 n.w.2d 641 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11127632-11127632"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11127690-11127690",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11127690",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Price",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11127690 us pension / defined benefit issues in re marriage of price qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11127690-11127690"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11131696-11131696",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11131696",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11131696",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11131696 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11131696-11131696"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11132773-11132773",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11132773",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF ANGELA BETH MILLER-VERDUYN AND JEREMY MILLER-VERDUYN Upon the Petition of ANGELA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24-1256",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "874 N.W.2d 103",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11132773 us pension / defined benefit issues 24-1256 874 n.w.2d 103 in re the marriage of angela beth miller-verduyn and jeremy miller-verduyn upon the petition of angela qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11132773-11132773"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11133981-11133981",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11133981",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11133981",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "555 U.S. 7",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11133981 us erisa / defined contribution issues 555 u.s. 7 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11133981-11133981"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11134084-11134084",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11134084",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11134084",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "881 S.W.2d 279",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11134084 us erisa / defined contribution issues 881 s.w.2d 279 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11134084-11134084"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11137484-11137484",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11137484",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11137484",
      "extracted_docket_number": "370181 Ontonagon Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11137484 us pension / defined benefit issues 370181 ontonagon circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11137484-11137484"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11138373-11138373",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11138373",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11138373",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11138373 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11138373-11138373"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11138920-11138920",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11138920",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LLC v. E",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "295 U.S. 735",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11138920 us pension / defined benefit issues 295 u.s. 735 llc v. e qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11138920-11138920"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11139198-11139198",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11139198",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11139198",
      "extracted_docket_number": "370312 Wayne Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11139198 us pension / defined benefit issues 370312 wayne circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11139198-11139198"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11139639-11139639",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11139639",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF ROZANNE MARIE BIRD AND JAMES ROY BIRD Upon the Petition of ROZANNE MARIE BIRD",
      "extracted_docket_number": "25-0324",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "733 N.W.2d 683",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11139639 us pension / defined benefit issues 25-0324 733 n.w.2d 683 in re the marriage of rozanne marie bird and james roy bird upon the petition of rozanne marie bird qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11139639-11139639"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11141202-11141202",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11141202",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11141202",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11141202 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11141202-11141202"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11141213-11141213",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11141213",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11141213",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11141213 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11141213-11141213"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11145116-11145116",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11145116",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11145116",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1694 MDA 2024",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "276 A.3d 221",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11145116 us pension / defined benefit issues 1694 mda 2024 276 a.3d 221 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11145116-11145116"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11146319-11146319",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11146319",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Ramsey",
      "extracted_docket_number": "5-24-1179 Supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11146319 us pension / defined benefit issues 5-24-1179 supreme in re marriage of ramsey qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11146319-11146319"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11149247-11149247",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11149247",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11149247",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "305 F.3d 439",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11149247 us erisa / defined contribution issues 305 f.3d 439 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11149247-11149247"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11152463-11152463",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11152463",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11152463",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11152463 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11152463-11152463"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11152716-11152716",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11152716",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "RICHLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION ET AL. v. BRICKLEY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11152716 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order richland county bar association et al. v. brickley qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11152716-11152716"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11152728-11152728",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11152728",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. GOLDEN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "769 N.E.2d 816",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11152728 us pension / defined benefit issues 769 n.e.2d 816 office of disciplinary counsel v. golden qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11152728-11152728"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11162425-11162425",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11162425",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11162425",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "575 F.3d 24",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11162425 us pension / defined benefit issues 575 f.3d 24 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11162425-11162425"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11164171-11164171",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11164171",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11164171",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "392 F.3d 1",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11164171 us pension / defined benefit issues 392 f.3d 1 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11164171-11164171"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11176396-11176396",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11176396",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11176396",
      "extracted_docket_number": "25AP-179 5 The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11176396 us pension / defined benefit issues 25ap-179 5 the qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11176396-11176396"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11177374-11177374",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11177374",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11177374",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "987 F.3d 616",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11177374 us pension / defined benefit issues 987 f.3d 616 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11177374-11177374"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11178295-11178295",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11178295",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "RONALD L. SHOEMAKE v. ANN L. SHOEMAKE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "401 S.W.3d 595",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11178295 us pension / defined benefit issues 401 s.w.3d 595 ronald l. shoemake v. ann l. shoemake qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11178295-11178295"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11182274-11182274",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11182274",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of Jon Lynn Kinning",
      "extracted_docket_number": "25CA0072 City and County of Denver District",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "960 P.2d 722",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11182274 us erisa / defined contribution issues 25ca0072 city and county of denver district 960 p.2d 722 in re the marriage of jon lynn kinning qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11182274-11182274"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11192244-11192244",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11192244",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SPONSLER v. SPONSLER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A19A2282 1. Ex-husband first argues that the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11192244 us erisa / defined contribution issues a19a2282 1. ex-husband first argues that the trial sponsler v. sponsler qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11192244-11192244"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11193786-11193786",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11193786",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "BROOKS v. BROOKS. HODGES",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11193786 us pension / defined benefit issues brooks v. brooks. hodges qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11193786-11193786"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11198732-11198732",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11198732",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Thornley",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4-25-0319 Carla Bender not precedent except",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11198732 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 4-25-0319 carla bender not precedent except domestic relations order in re marriage of thornley qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11198732-11198732"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11199361-11199361",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11199361",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11199361",
      "extracted_docket_number": "48414 XIOMARA ROBIRDS",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "454 P.3d 1092",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11199361 us erisa / defined contribution issues 48414 xiomara robirds 454 p.3d 1092 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11199361-11199361"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11199572-11199572",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11199572",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Thomas",
      "extracted_docket_number": "42875 LINDA C. KESTING",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "302 P.3d 357",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11199572 us pension / defined benefit issues 42875 linda c. kesting 302 p.3d 357 in re marriage of thomas qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11199572-11199572"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11199766-11199766",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11199766",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11199766",
      "extracted_docket_number": "50446 CHRIS D. FARNSWORTH",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "303 P.3d 214",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11199766 us pension / defined benefit issues 50446 chris d. farnsworth 303 p.3d 214 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11199766-11199766"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11202293-11202293",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11202293",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11202293",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of monthly checks",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "645 N.W.2d 96",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11202293 us pension / defined benefit issues of monthly checks 645 n.w.2d 96 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11202293-11202293"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11204914-11204914",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11204914",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11204914",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4049-23",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "290 U.S. 111",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11204914 us pension / defined benefit issues 4049-23 290 u.s. 111 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11204914-11204914"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11206541-11206541",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11206541",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of DeBenedetti & Ensberg",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "110 Cal.App.5th 1035",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11206541 us erisa / defined contribution issues 110 cal.app.5th 1035 in re marriage of debenedetti & ensberg qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11206541-11206541"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11216613-11216613",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11216613",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11216613",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "211 F.3d 938",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11216613 us pension / defined benefit issues 211 f.3d 938 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11216613-11216613"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11225987-11225987",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11225987",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of DeBenedetti & Ensberg",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "110 Cal.App.5th 1035",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11225987 us erisa / defined contribution issues 110 cal.app.5th 1035 in re marriage of debenedetti & ensberg qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11225987-11225987"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11226852-11226852",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11226852",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ET AL. v. THOMAS A. STEWART",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2024-01939-COA-R3-CV This",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11226852 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues m2024-01939-coa-r3-cv this domestic relations order et al. v. thomas a. stewart qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11226852-11226852"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11228237-11228237",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11228237",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR CHARLES F. HOLDEN APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE DERWIN L. WEBB",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2024-CA-1468-MR CHARLES F. HOLDEN APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "578 S.W.3d 356",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11228237 us pension / defined benefit issues 2024-ca-1468-mr charles f. holden appellant 578 s.w.3d 356 mr charles f. holden appellant appeal from jefferson circuit court v. honorable derwin l. webb qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11228237-11228237"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11229034-11229034",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11229034",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11229034",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-24-00256-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11229034 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13-24-00256-cv domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11229034-11229034"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11232567-11232567",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11232567",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11232567",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15-25-05 was signed by the parties and the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11232567 us erisa / defined contribution issues 15-25-05 was signed by the parties and the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11232567-11232567"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11232673-11232673",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11232673",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11232673",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11232673 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11232673-11232673"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11239633-11239633",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11239633",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "E.R. v. B.R",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "687 S.W.3d 285",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11239633 us pension / defined benefit issues 687 s.w.3d 285 e.r. v. b.r qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11239633-11239633"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11240637-11240637",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11240637",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11240637",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "571 U.S. 415",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11240637 us pension / defined benefit issues 571 u.s. 415 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11240637-11240637"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11243871-11243871",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11243871",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11243871",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "812 S.W.2d 487",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11243871 us erisa / defined contribution issues 812 s.w.2d 487 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11243871-11243871"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11244250-11244250",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11244250",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LLC v. F.W",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-24-0652 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "919 N.E.2d 333",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11244250 us pension / defined benefit issues 2-24-0652 order 919 n.e.2d 333 llc v. f.w qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11244250-11244250"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11244851-11244851",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11244851",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Winters",
      "extracted_docket_number": "5-25-0283 Supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "481 U.S. 619",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11244851 us pension / defined benefit issues 5-25-0283 supreme 481 u.s. 619 in re marriage of winters qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11244851-11244851"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11248468-11248468",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11248468",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11248468",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "712 S.W.3d 113",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11248468 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 712 s.w.3d 113 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11248468-11248468"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11249459-11249459",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11249459",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11249459",
      "extracted_docket_number": "25-1859 the claim but allowed the Estate to",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11249459 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 25-1859 the claim but allowed the estate to domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11249459-11249459"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11249986-11249986",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11249986",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11249986",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11249986 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11249986-11249986"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11252354-11252354",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11252354",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11252354",
      "extracted_docket_number": "45 at 7. The 8",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "697 F.3d 858",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11252354 us erisa / defined contribution issues 45 at 7. the 8 697 f.3d 858 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11252354-11252354"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11258406-11258406",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11258406",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11258406",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11258406 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11258406-11258406"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11261842-11261842",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11261842",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of LINH TU BAO TRAN and KRYSTAL BICH HUYEN VU HA. LINH TU BAO TRAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2 Cal.3d 557",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11261842 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2 cal.3d 557 in re the marriage of linh tu bao tran and krystal bich huyen vu ha. linh tu bao tran qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11261842-11261842"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11263584-11263584",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11263584",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11263584",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "394 P.3d 604",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11263584 us pension / defined benefit issues 394 p.3d 604 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11263584-11263584"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11265398-11265398",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11265398",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Scinto family residence",
      "extracted_docket_number": "37878-1-III In re Marriage of Scinto The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "815 P.2d 843",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11265398 us pension / defined benefit issues 37878-1-iii in re marriage of scinto the 815 p.2d 843 in re marriage of scinto family residence qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11265398-11265398"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11266024-11266024",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11266024",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Wallace",
      "extracted_docket_number": "82557-7-I/8 ANALYSIS Janice argues the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "45 P.3d 1131",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11266024 us pension / defined benefit issues 82557-7-i/8 analysis janice argues the trial 45 p.3d 1131 in re marriage of wallace qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11266024-11266024"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11268039-11268039",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11268039",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11268039",
      "extracted_docket_number": "30629 Appellant : : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11268039 us pension / defined benefit issues 30629 appellant : : trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11268039-11268039"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11269662-11269662",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11269662",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11269662",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "581 U.S. 214",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11269662 us pension / defined benefit issues 581 u.s. 214 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11269662-11269662"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11276663-11276663",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11276663",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of DAVID and TELETHA HAYNES. DAVID HAYNES",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "225 Cal.App.3d 469",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11276663 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 225 cal.app.3d 469 in re the marriage of david and teletha haynes. david haynes qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11276663-11276663"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11276733-11276733",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11276733",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of DAVID and TELETHA HAYNES. DAVID HAYNES",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "225 Cal.App.3d 469",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11276733 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 225 cal.app.3d 469 in re the marriage of david and teletha haynes. david haynes qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11276733-11276733"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11277968-11277968",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11277968",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11277968",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11277968 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11277968-11277968"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11281157-11281157",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11281157",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Landry",
      "extracted_docket_number": "60354-3-II inequitable because the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "699 P.2d 214",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11281157 us erisa / defined contribution issues 60354-3-ii inequitable because the trial 699 p.2d 214 in re marriage of landry qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11281157-11281157"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11281854-11281854",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11281854",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11281854",
      "extracted_docket_number": "65-2 at 10. The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "521 U.S. 591",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11281854 us erisa / defined contribution issues 65-2 at 10. the 521 u.s. 591 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11281854-11281854"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11284137-11284137",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11284137",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11284137",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11284137 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11284137-11284137"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11285622-11285622",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11285622",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11285622",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "778 So.2d 1105",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11285622 us pension / defined benefit issues 778 so.2d 1105 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11285622-11285622"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11286599-11286599",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11286599",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11286599",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "809 So.2d 1017",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11286599 us pension / defined benefit issues 809 so.2d 1017 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11286599-11286599"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11288770-11288770",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11288770",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Todd",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "500 U.S. 305",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11288770 us pension / defined benefit issues 500 u.s. 305 in re estate of todd qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11288770-11288770"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11291534-11291534",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11291534",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11291534",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "358 So.2d 919",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11291534 us pension / defined benefit issues 358 so.2d 919 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11291534-11291534"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11291622-11291622",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11291622",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11291622",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1: The Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11291622 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1: the trial domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11291622-11291622"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11294253-11294253",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11294253",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of DeWolfe",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11294253 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of dewolfe qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11294253-11294253"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11294427-11294427",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11294427",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11294427",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "358 So.2d 919",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11294427 us pension / defined benefit issues 358 so.2d 919 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11294427-11294427"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11295372-11295372",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11295372",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11295372",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Noel was even questioned by the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11295372 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues noel was even questioned by the trial domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11295372-11295372"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11295751-11295751",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11295751",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11295751",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 and 2: It was error for the Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "375 So.3d 548",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11295751 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 and 2: it was error for the trial 375 so.3d 548 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11295751-11295751"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1350622-1350622",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1350622",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1350622",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "757 P.2d 60",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1350622 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 757 p.2d 60 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1350622-1350622"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-145495-145495",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 145495",
      "citation": "1056\n    (d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CARMONA v. CARMONA JANIS CARMONA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "eight and nine. None of the previous seven wives are involved",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056\n    (d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 145495 1056 (d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues eight and nine. none of the previous seven wives are involved 1056 (d)(3) carmona v. carmona janis carmona qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-145495-145495"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-145914-145914",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 145914",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "DECEASED v. PLAN ADMINISTRATOR FOR DUPONT SAVINGS AND INVESTMENT PLAN ET AL. CERTIORARI TO",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 145914 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 1056(d)(3) deceased v. plan administrator for dupont savings and investment plan et al. certiorari to qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-145914-145914"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-147862-147862",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 147862",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 147862",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "574 F.3d 230",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 147862 us pension / defined benefit issues 574 f.3d 230 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-147862-147862"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1494072-1494072",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1494072",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1494072",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-93-423-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "888 S.W.2d 130",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1494072 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13-93-423-cv 888 s.w.2d 130 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1494072-1494072"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1509935-1509935",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1509935",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1509935",
      "extracted_docket_number": "98-272-Appeal. Supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "760 A.2d 1241",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1509935 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 98-272-appeal. supreme 760 a.2d 1241 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1509935-1509935"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-151142-151142",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 151142",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 151142",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "546 F.3d 639",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 151142 us pension / defined benefit issues 546 f.3d 639 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-151142-151142"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-151319-151319",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 151319",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "MACK v. KUCKENMEISTER JOAN R. MACK",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 151319 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order mack v. kuckenmeister joan r. mack qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-151319-151319"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-163413-163413",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 163413",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 163413",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 163413 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-163413-163413"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1652731-1652731",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1652731",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1652731",
      "extracted_docket_number": "06-97-00055-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "968 S.W.2d 947",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1652731 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 06-97-00055-cv 968 s.w.2d 947 qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1652731-1652731"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-165866-165866",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 165866",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 165866",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "381 F.3d 1015",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 165866 us pension / defined benefit issues 381 f.3d 1015 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-165866-165866"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1673135-1673135",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1673135",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1673135",
      "extracted_docket_number": "05-04-01374-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "202 S.W.3d 869",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1673135 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 05-04-01374-cv 202 s.w.3d 869 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1673135-1673135"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-168871-168871",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 168871",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 168871",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "392 F.3d 401",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 168871 us erisa / defined contribution issues 392 f.3d 401 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-168871-168871"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-17518-17518",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 17518",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 17518",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "463 U.S. 85",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 17518 us pension / defined benefit issues 463 u.s. 85 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-17518-17518"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-17522-17522",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 17522",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SEC v. W.J",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "67 F.3d 571",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 17522 us pension / defined benefit issues 67 f.3d 571 sec v. w.j qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-17522-17522"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-175547-175547",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 175547",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DOWNING v. OPM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "100 F.3d 141",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 175547 us pension / defined benefit issues 100 f.3d 141 downing v. opm qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-175547-175547"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1788072-1788072",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1788072",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1788072",
      "extracted_docket_number": "S-02-1405. Supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "661 N.W.2d 696",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1788072 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues s-02-1405. supreme 661 n.w.2d 696 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1788072-1788072"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1797755-1797755",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1797755",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1797755",
      "extracted_docket_number": "S-06-1271. Supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "626 N.W.2d 582",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1797755 us pension / defined benefit issues s-06-1271. supreme 626 n.w.2d 582 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1797755-1797755"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1955859-1955859",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1955859",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ROTH v. ROTH",
      "extracted_docket_number": "138031. Michigan",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "506 N.W.2d 900",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1955859 us pension / defined benefit issues 138031. michigan 506 n.w.2d 900 roth v. roth qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1955859-1955859"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2002495-2002495",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2002495",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JOAN ROHRBECK v. JOHN ROHRBECK",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "566 A.2d 767",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2002495 us pension / defined benefit issues 566 a.2d 767 joan rohrbeck v. john rohrbeck qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2002495-2002495"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-203209-203209",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 203209",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 203209",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 203209 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-203209-203209"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-208141-208141",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 208141",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 208141",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "919 A.2d 980",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 208141 us pension / defined benefit issues 919 a.2d 980 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-208141-208141"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-208740-208740",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 208740",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 208740",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "966 F.2d 650",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 208740 us pension / defined benefit issues 966 f.2d 650 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-208740-208740"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-20911-20911",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 20911",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 20911",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "18 F.3d 1321",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 20911 us pension / defined benefit issues 18 f.3d 1321 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-20911-20911"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-210977-210977",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 210977",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 210977",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 210977 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-210977-210977"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-211063-211063",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 211063",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 211063",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "100 F.3d 141",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 211063 us pension / defined benefit issues 100 f.3d 141 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-211063-211063"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-211879-211879",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 211879",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 211879",
      "extracted_docket_number": "SE-0831-03-0055-I-1",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 211879 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues se-0831-03-0055-i-1 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-211879-211879"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-211918-211918",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 211918",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 211918",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "145 F.3d 1480",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 211918 us pension / defined benefit issues 145 f.3d 1480 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-211918-211918"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2153953-2153953",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2153953",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the MARRIAGE OF Howard E. JOHNSTON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-89-2167. Appellate",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "562 N.E.2d 1004",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2153953 us pension / defined benefit issues 1-89-2167. appellate 562 n.e.2d 1004 in re the marriage of howard e. johnston qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2153953-2153953"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2158168-2158168",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2158168",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the MARRIAGE OF Jim E. NORFLEET",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4-92-0780. Appellate",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "612 N.E.2d 939",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2158168 us erisa / defined contribution issues 4-92-0780. appellate 612 n.e.2d 939 in re the marriage of jim e. norfleet qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2158168-2158168"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2177673-2177673",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2177673",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re MARRIAGE OF Tara MENKEN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-01-0610. Appellate",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2177673 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2-01-0610. appellate domestic relations order in re marriage of tara menken qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2177673-2177673"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-219329-219329",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 219329",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 219329",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1:10-cv-01776-RLV KURT R. WARD",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 219329 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1:10-cv-01776-rlv kurt r. ward domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-219329-219329"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2201807-2201807",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2201807",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JOHN ROCK v. PRISCILLA M. ROCK",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "587 A.2d 1133",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2201807 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 587 a.2d 1133 john rock v. priscilla m. rock qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2201807-2201807"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-221208-221208",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 221208",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 221208",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10-20015 This",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 221208 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 10-20015 this domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-221208-221208"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-221712-221712",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 221712",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ADLER v. OPM",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months to place",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "243 F.3d 1337",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 221712 us pension / defined benefit issues of months to place 243 f.3d 1337 adler v. opm qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-221712-221712"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-22324-22324",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 22324",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 22324",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "933 S.W.2d 522",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 22324 us erisa / defined contribution issues 933 s.w.2d 522 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-22324-22324"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-22374-22374",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 22374",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 22374",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "155 F.3d 507",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 22374 us erisa / defined contribution issues 155 f.3d 507 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-22374-22374"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2620339-2620339",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2620339",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of RICHARD M. BOGAN and LYNDA D. LEWIS. RICHARD M. BOGAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "203 Cal.App.4th 492",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2620339 us pension / defined benefit issues 203 cal.app.4th 492 in re the marriage of richard m. bogan and lynda d. lewis. richard m. bogan qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2620339-2620339"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-26237-26237",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 26237",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 26237",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 26237 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-26237-26237"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-26249-26249",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 26249",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 26249",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 26249 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-26249-26249"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2627362-2627362",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2627362",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re the MARRIAGE OF RITCHIE. Randall James Ritchie",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3. Court of Civil",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2627362 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 3. court of civil domestic relations order in re the marriage of ritchie. randall james ritchie qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2627362-2627362"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2631696-2631696",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2631696",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2631696",
      "extracted_docket_number": "05-184. Supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2631696 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 05-184. supreme qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2631696-2631696"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2637613-2637613",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2637613",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the MARRIAGE OF Cleone LEWIS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "01CA0013. Colorado",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "66 P.3d 204",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2637613 us pension / defined benefit issues 01ca0013. colorado 66 p.3d 204 in re the marriage of cleone lewis qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2637613-2637613"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2645677-2645677",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2645677",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of NATHAN and ROBIN LA MOURE. NATHAN D. LA MOURE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2645677 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re the marriage of nathan and robin la moure. nathan d. la moure qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2645677-2645677"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2645953-2645953",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2645953",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Strassner",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2645953 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues of months domestic relations order in re marriage of strassner qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2645953-2645953"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2646302-2646302",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2646302",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Strassner",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2646302 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues of months domestic relations order in re marriage of strassner qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2646302-2646302"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2646568-2646568",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2646568",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Shelstead",
      "extracted_docket_number": "years of marriage. It is the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "439 U.S. 573",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2646568 us pension / defined benefit issues years of marriage. it is the 439 u.s. 573 in re marriage of shelstead qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2646568-2646568"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2647833-2647833",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2647833",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CONNIE JUNE TIPTON STOUT v. JACKIE HAROLD STOUT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "E2013-00760-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "854 S.W.2d 87",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2647833 us pension / defined benefit issues e2013-00760-coa-r3-cv - 854 s.w.2d 87 connie june tipton stout v. jackie harold stout qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2647833-2647833"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2650774-2650774",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2650774",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of MAGGIE and",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "81 Cal.App.4th 1131",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2650774 us pension / defined benefit issues 81 cal.app.4th 1131 in re the marriage of maggie and qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2650774-2650774"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2650980-2650980",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2650980",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of SIGALIT VARDI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "H038931 and a timely notice of",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "172 Cal.App.4th 830",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2650980 us erisa / defined contribution issues h038931 and a timely notice of 172 cal.app.4th 830 in re the marriage of sigalit vardi qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2650980-2650980"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2651358-2651358",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2651358",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2651358",
      "extracted_docket_number": "for such purposes as may be necessary to grant full",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "532 U.S. 141",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2651358 us pension / defined benefit issues for such purposes as may be necessary to grant full 532 u.s. 141 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2651358-2651358"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2653183-2653183",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2653183",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ROBERT L. MACY v. OUIDA J. MACY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2012-02370-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "193 S.W.3d 495",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2653183 us pension / defined benefit issues m2012-02370-coa-r3-cv - 193 s.w.3d 495 robert l. macy v. ouida j. macy qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2653183-2653183"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2653513-2653513",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2653513",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2653513",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2653513 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2653513-2653513"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2654760-2654760",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2654760",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2654760",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1764-12S",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "290 U.S. 111",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2654760 us pension / defined benefit issues 1764-12s 290 u.s. 111 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2654760-2654760"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2657174-2657174",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2657174",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2657174",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of other accounts were raised in circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "383 S.W.3d 833",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2657174 us pension / defined benefit issues of other accounts were raised in circuit 383 s.w.3d 833 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2657174-2657174"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2659058-2659058",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2659058",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2659058",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2659058 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2659058-2659058"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2660521-2660521",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2660521",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2660521",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2660521 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2660521-2660521"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2660681-2660681",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2660681",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "PBGC v. LTV",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2660681 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order pbgc v. ltv qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2660681-2660681"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2670200-2670200",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2670200",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "NATALE v. NATALE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 12-0765",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "167 P.3d 705",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2670200 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 12-0765 167 p.3d 705 natale v. natale qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2670200-2670200"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2670581-2670581",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2670581",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2670581",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2670581 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2670581-2670581"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2671358-2671358",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2671358",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Pennington",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2671358 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 1056(d)(3) in re marriage of pennington qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2671358-2671358"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2671783-2671783",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2671783",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of RONALD T. and",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2671783 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of ronald t. and qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2671783-2671783"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2672634-2672634",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2672634",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2672634",
      "extracted_docket_number": "was entry of the final order and COAPs",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2672634 us pension / defined benefit issues was entry of the final order and coaps qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2672634-2672634"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2672717-2672717",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2672717",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2672717",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2:11-cr-14051-JEM-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2672717 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 2:11-cr-14051-jem-1 united states of america 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2672717-2672717"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2673169-2673169",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2673169",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of LESLIE and TERRY MOORE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "203 Cal.App.3d 705",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2673169 us pension / defined benefit issues 203 cal.app.3d 705 in re the marriage of leslie and terry moore qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2673169-2673169"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2673609-2673609",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2673609",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Busch",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "301 S.W.3d 104",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2673609 us pension / defined benefit issues 301 s.w.3d 104 in re marriage of busch qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2673609-2673609"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2673958-2673958",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2673958",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DAVID RAY HOGGATT v. LORI ANN HOGGATT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "60 S.W.3d 721",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2673958 us pension / defined benefit issues 60 s.w.3d 721 david ray hoggatt v. lori ann hoggatt qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2673958-2673958"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2675302-2675302",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2675302",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2675302",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "909 P.2d 314",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2675302 us pension / defined benefit issues 909 p.2d 314 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2675302-2675302"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2676785-2676785",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2676785",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Green",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "400 S.W.3d 869",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2676785 us pension / defined benefit issues 400 s.w.3d 869 in re marriage of green qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2676785-2676785"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2679768-2679768",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2679768",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of VIRGINIA C. and DAVID H",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 F.2d 1450",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2679768 us pension / defined benefit issues 937 f.2d 1450 in re the marriage of virginia c. and david h qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2679768-2679768"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2679799-2679799",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2679799",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JOHNSON v. JOHNSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20120229",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "270 P.3d 556",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2679799 us pension / defined benefit issues 20120229 270 p.3d 556 johnson v. johnson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2679799-2679799"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2679924-2679924",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2679924",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "J. KENNEBEC COUNTY v. MAINE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM ALEXANDER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "for entry of a judgment vacating the Board",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1 A.3d 431",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2679924 us erisa / defined contribution issues for entry of a judgment vacating the board 1 a.3d 431 j. kennebec county v. maine public employees retirement system alexander qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2679924-2679924"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2680364-2680364",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2680364",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2680364",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20130353",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "757 N.W.2d 50",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2680364 us pension / defined benefit issues 20130353 757 n.w.2d 50 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2680364-2680364"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2681113-2681113",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2681113",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ET AL. v. DOMINION COVE POINT LNG",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "193 F.3d 818",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2681113 us pension / defined benefit issues 193 f.3d 818 et al. v. dominion cove point lng qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2681113-2681113"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2684566-2684566",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2684566",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "NORA LYNNE VALENTINE v. JOEL ROBERT VALENTINE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "70 A.3d 13",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2684566 us erisa / defined contribution issues 70 a.3d 13 nora lynne valentine v. joel robert valentine qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2684566-2684566"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2684763-2684763",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2684763",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "J.M. v. HOBBS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "S-13-616. 1. Constitutional Law: Statutes:",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "797 N.W.2d 227",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2684763 us pension / defined benefit issues s-13-616. 1. constitutional law: statutes: 797 n.w.2d 227 j.m. v. hobbs qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2684763-2684763"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2684890-2684890",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2684890",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JEAN MARIE BAILEY v. BILLIE CARSON BAILEY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "898 S.W.2d 177",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2684890 us pension / defined benefit issues 898 s.w.2d 177 jean marie bailey v. billie carson bailey qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2684890-2684890"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2687360-2687360",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2687360",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "FRIDAY v. FRIDAY. HINES",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2687360 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues friday v. friday. hines qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2687360-2687360"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2687685-2687685",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2687685",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF ANITA D. GHEE AND WILLIAM J. GHEE JR",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-1780",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "431 N.W.2d 773",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2687685 us pension / defined benefit issues 13-1780 431 n.w.2d 773 in re the marriage of anita d. ghee and william j. ghee jr qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2687685-2687685"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2687825-2687825",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2687825",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Jacobo",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-1195",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "526 N.W.2d 859",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2687825 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13-1195 526 n.w.2d 859 in re marriage of jacobo qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2687825-2687825"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2687978-2687978",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2687978",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JENNIFER M. CAMPBELL AND JOEL T. CAMPBELL Upon the Petition of JENNIFER M",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-1383",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "705 N.W.2d 312",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2687978 us erisa / defined contribution issues 13-1383 705 n.w.2d 312 in re the marriage of jennifer m. campbell and joel t. campbell upon the petition of jennifer m qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2687978-2687978"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2688238-2688238",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2688238",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Brown",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3-1113 / 13-0534",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "776 N.W.2d 644",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2688238 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 3-1113 / 13-0534 776 n.w.2d 644 in re marriage of brown qualified_domestic_relations_order alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2688238-2688238"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2688415-2688415",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2688415",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Smith",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-12-1245 Opinion",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2688415 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 2-12-1245 opinion domestic relations order in re marriage of smith qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2688415-2688415"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2688447-2688447",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2688447",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "L ORI A. R OBINETTE v. L UANN H UNSECKER",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "897 A.2d 810",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2688447 us pension / defined benefit issues 897 a.2d 810 l ori a. r obinette v. l uann h unsecker qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2688447-2688447"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2689442-2689442",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2689442",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2689442",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "400 N.E.2d 384",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2689442 us pension / defined benefit issues 400 n.e.2d 384 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2689442-2689442"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2689556-2689556",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2689556",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2689556",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of motions with the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "351 N.E.2d 113",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2689556 us pension / defined benefit issues of motions with the trial 351 n.e.2d 113 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2689556-2689556"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2690138-2690138",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2690138",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2690138",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "791 N.E.2d 434",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2690138 us pension / defined benefit issues 791 n.e.2d 434 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2690138-2690138"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2690592-2690592",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2690592",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DAYTON BAR ASSOCIATION v. MATLOCK",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "726 N.E.2d 1006",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2690592 us pension / defined benefit issues 726 n.e.2d 1006 dayton bar association v. matlock qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2690592-2690592"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2690626-2690626",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2690626",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. DANN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "804 N.E.2d 428",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2690626 us pension / defined benefit issues 804 n.e.2d 428 disciplinary counsel v. dann qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2690626-2690626"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2690720-2690720",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2690720",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. FORD",
      "extracted_docket_number": "did not show that a revised motion had been filed",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "775 N.E.2d 818",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2690720 us pension / defined benefit issues did not show that a revised motion had been filed 775 n.e.2d 818 disciplinary counsel v. ford qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2690720-2690720"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2691502-2691502",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2691502",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2691502",
      "extracted_docket_number": "363 EDA 2013",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "603 A.2d 641",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2691502 us pension / defined benefit issues 363 eda 2013 603 a.2d 641 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2691502-2691502"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2691749-2691749",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2691749",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2691749",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "886 N.E.2d 201",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2691749 us pension / defined benefit issues 886 n.e.2d 201 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2691749-2691749"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2692868-2692868",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2692868",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2692868",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2013-CA-30 Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "661 N.E.2d 175",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2692868 us pension / defined benefit issues 2013-ca-30 trial 661 n.e.2d 175 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2692868-2692868"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2692947-2692947",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2692947",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2692947",
      "extracted_docket_number": "does not indicate that Neelima initially filed a mo",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "903 N.E.2d 343",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2692947 us erisa / defined contribution issues does not indicate that neelima initially filed a mo 903 n.e.2d 343 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2692947-2692947"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2693011-2693011",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2693011",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2693011",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2013-CA-2 Plaintiff-Appellee : : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "632 N.E.2d 916",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2693011 us pension / defined benefit issues 2013-ca-2 plaintiff-appellee : : trial 632 n.e.2d 916 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2693011-2693011"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2693050-2693050",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2693050",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2693050",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "450 N.E.2d 1140",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2693050 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 450 n.e.2d 1140 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2693050-2693050"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2693473-2693473",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2693473",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2693473",
      "extracted_docket_number": "25333 Plaintiff-Appellant : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "905 N.E.2d 172",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2693473 us pension / defined benefit issues 25333 plaintiff-appellant : v. : trial 905 n.e.2d 172 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2693473-2693473"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2693677-2693677",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2693677",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2693677",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2012-CA-5 Plaintiff-Appellant : : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "912 N.E.2d 1170",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2693677 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2012-ca-5 plaintiff-appellant : : trial 912 n.e.2d 1170 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2693677-2693677"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2693686-2693686",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2693686",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2693686",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "878 N.E.2d 16",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2693686 us pension / defined benefit issues 878 n.e.2d 16 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2693686-2693686"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2693885-2693885",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2693885",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2693885",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "351 N.E.2d 113",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2693885 us pension / defined benefit issues 351 n.e.2d 113 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2693885-2693885"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2694029-2694029",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2694029",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2694029",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "615 N.E.2d 332",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2694029 us pension / defined benefit issues 615 n.e.2d 332 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2694029-2694029"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2694070-2694070",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2694070",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2694070",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "661 N.E.2d 175",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2694070 us pension / defined benefit issues 661 n.e.2d 175 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2694070-2694070"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2694501-2694501",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2694501",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2694501",
      "extracted_docket_number": "23538 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2694501 us pension / defined benefit issues 23538 : v. : trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2694501-2694501"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2694536-2694536",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2694536",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2694536",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24391 Plaintiff-Appellant : : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2694536 us pension / defined benefit issues 24391 plaintiff-appellant : : trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2694536-2694536"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696104-2696104",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696104",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2696104",
      "extracted_docket_number": "8-13-16 contempt finding is whether the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696104 us erisa / defined contribution issues 8-13-16 contempt finding is whether the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696104-2696104"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696122-2696122",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696122",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Couture",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4-13-13 which will produce",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "532 U.S. 141",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696122 us pension / defined benefit issues 4-13-13 which will produce 532 u.s. 141 in re estate of couture qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696122-2696122"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696184-2696184",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696184",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2696184",
      "extracted_docket_number": "I The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696184 us erisa / defined contribution issues i the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696184-2696184"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696221-2696221",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696221",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2696221",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10-13-05 ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR 1 THE TRIAL",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696221 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 10-13-05 assignment of error 1 the trial domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696221-2696221"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696313-2696313",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696313",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2696313",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4-12-21 that concession. The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "532 U.S. 141",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696313 us pension / defined benefit issues 4-12-21 that concession. the trial 532 u.s. 141 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696313-2696313"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696440-2696440",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696440",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Beckman",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10-11-09 the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "599 P.2d 1004",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696440 us pension / defined benefit issues 10-11-09 the trial 599 p.2d 1004 in re marriage of beckman qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696440-2696440"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696453-2696453",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696453",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2696453",
      "extracted_docket_number": "I The Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696453 us pension / defined benefit issues i the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696453-2696453"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696505-2696505",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696505",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2696505",
      "extracted_docket_number": "5-11-38 Assignment of Error The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "655 N.E.2d 1381",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696505 us pension / defined benefit issues 5-11-38 assignment of error the trial 655 n.e.2d 1381 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696505-2696505"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696542-2696542",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696542",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2696542",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-11-28 ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NO. I THE TRIAL",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696542 us pension / defined benefit issues 17-11-28 assignment of error no. i the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696542-2696542"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696666-2696666",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696666",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2696666",
      "extracted_docket_number": "I THE TRIAL",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "450 N.E.2d 1140",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696666 us pension / defined benefit issues i the trial 450 n.e.2d 1140 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696666-2696666"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696725-2696725",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696725",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2696725",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of exhibits for the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "523 N.E.2d 846",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696725 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues of exhibits for the trial 523 n.e.2d 846 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696725-2696725"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2697627-2697627",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2697627",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2697627",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "514 N.E.2d 1122",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2697627 us pension / defined benefit issues 514 n.e.2d 1122 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2697627-2697627"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2697842-2697842",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2697842",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2697842",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10CA15 5 THE TRIAL",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2697842 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 10ca15 5 the trial domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2697842-2697842"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2697902-2697902",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2697902",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2697902",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10CA15 9 inherent power of the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "351 N.E.2d 113",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2697902 us pension / defined benefit issues 10ca15 9 inherent power of the 351 n.e.2d 113 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2697902-2697902"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2697978-2697978",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2697978",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2697978",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "723 N.E.2d 1117",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2697978 us pension / defined benefit issues 723 n.e.2d 1117 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2697978-2697978"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2698043-2698043",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2698043",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2698043",
      "extracted_docket_number": "reflects that the trial court issued a qualified do",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2698043 us pension / defined benefit issues reflects that the trial court issued a qualified do qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2698043-2698043"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2698120-2698120",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2698120",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2698120",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2698120 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2698120-2698120"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2698639-2698639",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2698639",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2698639",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "554 N.E.2d 83",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2698639 us erisa / defined contribution issues 554 n.e.2d 83 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2698639-2698639"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2698834-2698834",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2698834",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2698834",
      "extracted_docket_number": "CT2012-0056 4 payment of spousal support",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "421 N.E.2d 1293",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2698834 us pension / defined benefit issues ct2012-0056 4 payment of spousal support 421 n.e.2d 1293 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2698834-2698834"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2698871-2698871",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2698871",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2698871",
      "extracted_docket_number": "12-CA-36 6 other party as a party to the case. The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "690 N.E.2d 515",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2698871 us pension / defined benefit issues 12-ca-36 6 other party as a party to the case. the trial 690 n.e.2d 515 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2698871-2698871"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2698949-2698949",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2698949",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2698949",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "514 N.E.2d 1122",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2698949 us erisa / defined contribution issues 514 n.e.2d 1122 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2698949-2698949"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2699180-2699180",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2699180",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2699180",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2012CA00041 13",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "480 N.E.2d 1112",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2699180 us pension / defined benefit issues 2012ca00041 13 480 n.e.2d 1112 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2699180-2699180"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2699338-2699338",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2699338",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2699338",
      "extracted_docket_number": "11 CAF 11 0102 7",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "471 N.E.2d 785",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2699338 us erisa / defined contribution issues 11 caf 11 0102 7 471 n.e.2d 785 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2699338-2699338"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2699615-2699615",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2699615",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2699615",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2699615 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2699615-2699615"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2699653-2699653",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2699653",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2699653",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years the appellant participated",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "453 U.S. 210",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2699653 us pension / defined benefit issues of years the appellant participated 453 u.s. 210 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension military_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2699653-2699653"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2699910-2699910",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2699910",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2699910",
      "extracted_docket_number": "used",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "748 N.E.2d 528",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2699910 us pension / defined benefit issues used 748 n.e.2d 528 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2699910-2699910"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2700098-2700098",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2700098",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2700098",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10 CA 115 12",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "472 N.E.2d 328",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2700098 us erisa / defined contribution issues 10 ca 115 12 472 n.e.2d 328 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2700098-2700098"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2700454-2700454",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2700454",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2700454",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2010-CA-00193 3 the Security Plan. The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2700454 us pension / defined benefit issues 2010-ca-00193 3 the security plan. the qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2700454-2700454"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2700477-2700477",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2700477",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2700477",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10 CA 118 7",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "855 N.E.2d 533",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2700477 us pension / defined benefit issues 10 ca 118 7 855 n.e.2d 533 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2700477-2700477"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2701213-2701213",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2701213",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2701213",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2701213 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2701213-2701213"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2701394-2701394",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2701394",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2701394",
      "extracted_docket_number": "08NO353. We held that the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2701394 us pension / defined benefit issues 08no353. we held that the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2701394-2701394"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2701473-2701473",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2701473",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2701473",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "546 N.E.2d 950",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2701473 us pension / defined benefit issues 546 n.e.2d 950 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2701473-2701473"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2701938-2701938",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2701938",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2701938",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "541 N.E.2d 1028",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2701938 us pension / defined benefit issues 541 n.e.2d 1028 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2701938-2701938"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2702275-2702275",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2702275",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2702275",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "635 N.E.2d 308",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2702275 us pension / defined benefit issues 635 n.e.2d 308 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2702275-2702275"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2702380-2702380",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2702380",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2702380",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "554 N.E.2d 83",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2702380 us pension / defined benefit issues 554 n.e.2d 83 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2702380-2702380"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2704152-2704152",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2704152",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2704152",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "541 N.E.2d 1028",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2704152 us pension / defined benefit issues 541 n.e.2d 1028 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2704152-2704152"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2704625-2704625",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2704625",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2704625",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2704625 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2704625-2704625"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2705096-2705096",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2705096",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2705096",
      "extracted_docket_number": "26957 26962 Appellant v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2705096 us pension / defined benefit issues 26957 26962 appellant v qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2705096-2705096"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2705158-2705158",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2705158",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Seders",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13CA0009 Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2705158 us pension / defined benefit issues 13ca0009 appellee v in re marriage of seders qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2705158-2705158"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2705396-2705396",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2705396",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2705396",
      "extracted_docket_number": "12CA0035 Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2705396 us pension / defined benefit issues 12ca0035 appellee v qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2705396-2705396"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2705492-2705492",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2705492",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2705492",
      "extracted_docket_number": "26418 Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2705492 us pension / defined benefit issues 26418 appellee v qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension 401k present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2705492-2705492"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2705723-2705723",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2705723",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2705723",
      "extracted_docket_number": "11CA010091 Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2705723 us pension / defined benefit issues 11ca010091 appellee v qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2705723-2705723"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2706430-2706430",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2706430",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2706430",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10CA0034-M Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2706430 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 10ca0034-m appellee v domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2706430-2706430"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2706551-2706551",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2706551",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2706551",
      "extracted_docket_number": "25319 Appellee/Cross-Appellant v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2706551 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 25319 appellee/cross-appellant v domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2706551-2706551"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2707258-2707258",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2707258",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2707258",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2707258 us pension / defined benefit issues of years qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2707258-2707258"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2707393-2707393",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2707393",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2707393",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2707393 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2707393-2707393"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2707453-2707453",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2707453",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2707453",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "671 N.E.2d 236",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2707453 us pension / defined benefit issues 671 n.e.2d 236 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2707453-2707453"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2707664-2707664",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2707664",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2707664",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "541 N.E.2d 1028",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2707664 us pension / defined benefit issues 541 n.e.2d 1028 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2707664-2707664"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2713828-2713828",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2713828",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of DARYL HOWARD and",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2713828 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of daryl howard and qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2713828-2713828"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2716879-2716879",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2716879",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2716879",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "41 A.3d 248",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2716879 us pension / defined benefit issues 41 a.3d 248 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2716879-2716879"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2718533-2718533",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2718533",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2718533",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2718533 us pension / defined benefit issues of the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2718533-2718533"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2719306-2719306",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2719306",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "SMITH v. OPM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2719306 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order smith v. opm qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2719306-2719306"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2722563-2722563",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2722563",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "APPELLATE DIVISION v. MICHAEL KRUPINSKI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-2300-12T2 KATHLEEN KRUPINSKI",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2722563 us pension / defined benefit issues a-2300-12t2 kathleen krupinski appellate division v. michael krupinski qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2722563-2722563"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2722866-2722866",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2722866",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2722866",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1804 WDA 2013",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "888 A.2d 906",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2722866 us pension / defined benefit issues 1804 wda 2013 888 a.2d 906 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2722866-2722866"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2725843-2725843",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2725843",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2725843",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "742 N.E.2d 991",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2725843 us pension / defined benefit issues 742 n.e.2d 991 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2725843-2725843"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2726000-2726000",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2726000",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2726000",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "766 N.E.2d 1240",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2726000 us pension / defined benefit issues 766 n.e.2d 1240 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2726000-2726000"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2727378-2727378",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2727378",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "J.I. v. J.H",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "421 N.E.2d 647",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2727378 us erisa / defined contribution issues 421 n.e.2d 647 j.i. v. j.h qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2727378-2727378"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2727384-2727384",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2727384",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Rife",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "561 N.E.2d 809",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2727384 us pension / defined benefit issues 561 n.e.2d 809 in re marriage of rife qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2727384-2727384"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2727742-2727742",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2727742",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Preston",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "740 N.E.2d 582",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2727742 us pension / defined benefit issues 740 n.e.2d 582 in re marriage of preston qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2727742-2727742"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2727798-2727798",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2727798",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2727798",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "777 N.E.2d 41",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2727798 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 777 n.e.2d 41 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2727798-2727798"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2727934-2727934",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2727934",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Dean",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "956 N.E.2d 1084",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2727934 us erisa / defined contribution issues 956 n.e.2d 1084 in re marriage of dean qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2727934-2727934"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2728704-2728704",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2728704",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2728704",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA13-986 NORTH CAROLINA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2728704 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues coa13-986 north carolina qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2728704-2728704"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2728792-2728792",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2728792",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2728792",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA13-1133 NORTH CAROLINA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2728792 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues coa13-1133 north carolina qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2728792-2728792"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2728823-2728823",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2728823",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "D.B. v. M.B.V",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2728823 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order d.b. v. m.b.v qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2728823-2728823"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2728873-2728873",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2728873",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Carnes",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "911 N.E.2d 660",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2728873 us pension / defined benefit issues 911 n.e.2d 660 in re estate of carnes qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2728873-2728873"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2729862-2729862",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2729862",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Church",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "927 N.E.2d 926",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2729862 us pension / defined benefit issues 927 n.e.2d 926 in re marriage of church qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2729862-2729862"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2729895-2729895",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2729895",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Nickels",
      "extracted_docket_number": "moving is properly a high priority for our trial be",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "834 N.E.2d 1091",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2729895 us pension / defined benefit issues moving is properly a high priority for our trial be 834 n.e.2d 1091 in re marriage of nickels qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2729895-2729895"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2730212-2730212",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2730212",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "R.R.F. v. L.L.F",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of factors that a trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "754 N.E.2d 619",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2730212 us pension / defined benefit issues of factors that a trial 754 n.e.2d 619 r.r.f. v. l.l.f qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2730212-2730212"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2730337-2730337",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2730337",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2730337",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "952 N.E.2d 744",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2730337 us pension / defined benefit issues 952 n.e.2d 744 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2730337-2730337"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2730909-2730909",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2730909",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "L.F.R. v. R.A.R",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "717 N.E.2d 1249",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2730909 us pension / defined benefit issues 717 n.e.2d 1249 l.f.r. v. r.a.r qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2730909-2730909"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2732037-2732037",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2732037",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2732037",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "40 A.3d 917",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2732037 us pension / defined benefit issues 40 a.3d 917 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2732037-2732037"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2732060-2732060",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2732060",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Preston",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2732060 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of preston qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2732060-2732060"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2732989-2732989",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2732989",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Micheli",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Second District Docket No. 2-12-1245",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2732989 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues second district docket no. 2-12-1245 domestic relations order in re marriage of micheli qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2732989-2732989"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2733181-2733181",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2733181",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Green",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "954 S.W.2d 681",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2733181 us pension / defined benefit issues 954 s.w.2d 681 in re marriage of green qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2733181-2733181"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2734273-2734273",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2734273",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2734273",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15737-12S",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "290 U.S. 111",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2734273 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 15737-12s 290 u.s. 111 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2734273-2734273"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2735575-2735575",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2735575",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2735575",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-DR-0154",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2735575 us pension / defined benefit issues 13-dr-0154 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2735575-2735575"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2738355-2738355",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2738355",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2738355",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER Appellant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "931 F.2d 1544",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2738355 us pension / defined benefit issues number appellant 931 f.2d 1544 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2738355-2738355"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2738512-2738512",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2738512",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of SHARRON STEED and JAMES STEED. CANDICE STEED",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2738512 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of sharron steed and james steed. candice steed qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2738512-2738512"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2738841-2738841",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2738841",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF DAVID PAUL WALKER AND JEANETTE RENEE WALKER Upon the Petition of DAVID PAUL",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-1310",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 N.W.2d 252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2738841 us pension / defined benefit issues 13-1310 545 n.w.2d 252 in re the marriage of david paul walker and jeanette renee walker upon the petition of david paul qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2738841-2738841"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2739477-2739477",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2739477",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2739477",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2739477 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2739477-2739477"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2739667-2739667",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2739667",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2739667",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "153 P.3d 945",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2739667 us pension / defined benefit issues 153 p.3d 945 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2739667-2739667"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2739872-2739872",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2739872",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2739872",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2739872 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2739872-2739872"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2741337-2741337",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2741337",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "OLADE v. OLADE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 13-0296",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "9 P.3d 329",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2741337 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 13-0296 9 p.3d 329 olade v. olade qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2741337-2741337"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2741959-2741959",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2741959",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Green",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "341 S.W.3d 169",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2741959 us pension / defined benefit issues 341 s.w.3d 169 in re marriage of green qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2741959-2741959"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2742400-2742400",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2742400",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JAIME MCMANUS AND THOMAS RONALD MCMANUS Upon the Petition of JAIME MCMANUS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-1878",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "489 N.W.2d 394",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2742400 us pension / defined benefit issues 13-1878 489 n.w.2d 394 in re the marriage of jaime mcmanus and thomas ronald mcmanus upon the petition of jaime mcmanus qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2742400-2742400"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2742820-2742820",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2742820",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COA GEORGE AARON APPELLANT v. ANNIE AARON APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2742820 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues coa george aaron appellant v. annie aaron appellee date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2742820-2742820"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2744004-2744004",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2744004",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2744004",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA14-241 NORTH CAROLINA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2744004 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues coa14-241 north carolina domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2744004-2744004"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2745889-2745889",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2745889",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of MARJORIE ANNE and",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2745889 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues in re marriage of marjorie anne and qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2745889-2745889"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2746106-2746106",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2746106",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2746106",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-CA-27 5 trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2746106 us pension / defined benefit issues 14-ca-27 5 trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2746106-2746106"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2746446-2746446",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2746446",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MATTHEW MORRIS AND ALLISON MORRIS Upon the Petition of MATTHEW MORRIS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-1884",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "715 N.W.2d 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2746446 us erisa / defined contribution issues 13-1884 715 n.w.2d 242 in re the marriage of matthew morris and allison morris upon the petition of matthew morris qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2746446-2746446"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2748655-2748655",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2748655",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2748655",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10. There is no other evidence",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "432 N.E.2d 183",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2748655 us pension / defined benefit issues 10. there is no other evidence 432 n.e.2d 183 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2748655-2748655"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2751146-2751146",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2751146",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2751146",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "145 U.S. 368",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2751146 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 145 u.s. 368 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2751146-2751146"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2751976-2751976",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2751976",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2751976",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2751976 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2751976-2751976"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2752209-2752209",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2752209",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2752209",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2014-308-M.P",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "701 A.2d 1018",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2752209 us pension / defined benefit issues 2014-308-m.p 701 a.2d 1018 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2752209-2752209"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2752803-2752803",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2752803",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of MARIA CARMEN and JULIO CESAR SANTILLAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "190 Cal.App.4th 739",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2752803 us erisa / defined contribution issues 190 cal.app.4th 739 in re the marriage of maria carmen and julio cesar santillan qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2752803-2752803"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2753338-2753338",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2753338",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2753338",
      "extracted_docket_number": "310479 Macomb Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2753338 us pension / defined benefit issues 310479 macomb circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2753338-2753338"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2754086-2754086",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2754086",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2754086",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2014-308-M.P",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "701 A.2d 1018",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2754086 us pension / defined benefit issues 2014-308-m.p 701 a.2d 1018 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2754086-2754086"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2754522-2754522",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2754522",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2754522",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2014-308-M.P",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "701 A.2d 1018",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2754522 us pension / defined benefit issues 2014-308-m.p 701 a.2d 1018 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2754522-2754522"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2755697-2755697",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2755697",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF KATHLEEN KAY KOETHER AND GREGORY SCOTT KOETHER Upon the Petition of KATHLEEN KAY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-2047",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "827 N.W.2d 671",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2755697 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13-2047 827 n.w.2d 671 in re the marriage of kathleen kay koether and gregory scott koether upon the petition of kathleen kay qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2755697-2755697"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2758188-2758188",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2758188",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2758188",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "541 N.E.2d 1028",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2758188 us pension / defined benefit issues 541 n.e.2d 1028 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2758188-2758188"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2759298-2759298",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2759298",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2759298",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2759298 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2759298-2759298"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2761154-2761154",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2761154",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "L.P.A. v. C.J",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "461 N.E.2d 1295",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2761154 us pension / defined benefit issues 461 n.e.2d 1295 l.p.a. v. c.j qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2761154-2761154"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2765083-2765083",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2765083",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2765083",
      "extracted_docket_number": "303 WDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "714 A.2d 1016",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2765083 us pension / defined benefit issues 303 wda 2014 714 a.2d 1016 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2765083-2765083"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2765506-2765506",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2765506",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2765506",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2765506 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2765506-2765506"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2769818-2769818",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2769818",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Preston",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "991 N.E.2d 992",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2769818 us pension / defined benefit issues 991 n.e.2d 992 in re marriage of preston qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2769818-2769818"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2771241-2771241",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2771241",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "APPELLANTS v. MELISSA VANDERKAM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "520 U.S. 833",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2771241 us pension / defined benefit issues 520 u.s. 833 appellants v. melissa vanderkam qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2771241-2771241"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2771373-2771373",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2771373",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2771373",
      "extracted_docket_number": "CH-0831-11-0312-I-1. Id. 2",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "918 F.2d 187",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2771373 us pension / defined benefit issues ch-0831-11-0312-i-1. id. 2 918 f.2d 187 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2771373-2771373"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2772541-2772541",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2772541",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2772541",
      "extracted_docket_number": "sheet states that on July 9",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "352 S.W.3d 462",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2772541 us pension / defined benefit issues sheet states that on july 9 352 s.w.3d 462 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2772541-2772541"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2773194-2773194",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2773194",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2773194",
      "extracted_docket_number": "I THE TRIAL",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2773194 us pension / defined benefit issues i the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2773194-2773194"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2778118-2778118",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2778118",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "L.L.C. v. NCP",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years that the spouse was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2778118 us pension / defined benefit issues of years that the spouse was l.l.c. v. ncp qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2778118-2778118"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2778396-2778396",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2778396",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2778396",
      "extracted_docket_number": "898 WDA 2014 : Appellant :",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "935 A.2d 547",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2778396 us pension / defined benefit issues 898 wda 2014 : appellant : 935 a.2d 547 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2778396-2778396"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2778624-2778624",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2778624",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF TERRY L. CARLSON AND WILLIAM J. CARLSON Upon the Petition of TERRY L. CARLSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-1854",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 N.W.2d 252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2778624 us pension / defined benefit issues 13-1854 545 n.w.2d 252 in re the marriage of terry l. carlson and william j. carlson upon the petition of terry l. carlson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2778624-2778624"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2778953-2778953",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2778953",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "AFL-CIO v. U.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2778953 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order afl-cio v. u.s qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2778953-2778953"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2779079-2779079",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2779079",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "KRENZEN v. KATZ",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 14-0037",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "977 P.2d 807",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2779079 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1 ca-cv 14-0037 977 p.2d 807 krenzen v. katz qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2779079-2779079"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2779317-2779317",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2779317",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Epsteen",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-13-0961 Opinion",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2779317 us pension / defined benefit issues 2-13-0961 opinion in re marriage of epsteen qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2779317-2779317"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2780110-2780110",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2780110",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "G.A. v. D.L",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1014 EDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "947 A.2d 750",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2780110 us pension / defined benefit issues 1014 eda 2014 947 a.2d 750 g.a. v. d.l qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2780110-2780110"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2780113-2780113",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2780113",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2780113",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2280 EDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "857 A.2d 194",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2780113 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2280 eda 2014 857 a.2d 194 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2780113-2780113"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2780921-2780921",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2780921",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Myers",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2780921 us pension / defined benefit issues in re marriage of myers qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2780921-2780921"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2781321-2781321",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2781321",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2781321",
      "extracted_docket_number": "865 MDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2781321 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 865 mda 2014 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2781321-2781321"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2782328-2782328",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2782328",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2782328",
      "extracted_docket_number": "140350",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2782328 us pension / defined benefit issues 140350 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2782328-2782328"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2782750-2782750",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2782750",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JOSEPHINE WHITTHORNE YOUNG v. WILLIAM F. YOUNG",
      "extracted_docket_number": "W2014-02006-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "342 S.W.3d 19",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2782750 us pension / defined benefit issues w2014-02006-coa-r3-cv - 342 s.w.3d 19 josephine whitthorne young v. william f. young qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2782750-2782750"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2783346-2783346",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2783346",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Rock",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2783346 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re estate of rock qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2783346-2783346"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2783468-2783468",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2783468",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2783468",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-14-335",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "846 N.W.2d 205",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2783468 us pension / defined benefit issues a-14-335 846 n.w.2d 205 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2783468-2783468"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2783787-2783787",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2783787",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of PHILLIP and GLORIA PINON. PHILLIP LOUIS PINON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2783787 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order in re the marriage of phillip and gloria pinon. phillip louis pinon qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2783787-2783787"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2784107-2784107",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2784107",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2784107",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER Appellant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2784107 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues number appellant domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2784107-2784107"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2788825-2788825",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2788825",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COA JOHN T. WALKER APPELLANT v. MARY M. WALKER APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2788825 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues coa john t. walker appellant v. mary m. walker appellee date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2788825-2788825"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2788932-2788932",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2788932",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Myers",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Third District Docket No. 3-13-0651",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2788932 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues third district docket no. 3-13-0651 domestic relations order in re marriage of myers qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2788932-2788932"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2788939-2788939",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2788939",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Bushnell",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "328 P.3d 608",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2788939 us pension / defined benefit issues 328 p.3d 608 in re marriage of bushnell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2788939-2788939"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2789367-2789367",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2789367",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2789367",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2789367 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2789367-2789367"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2789648-2789648",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2789648",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2789648",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14–1201",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "855 N.W.2d 156",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2789648 us pension / defined benefit issues 14–1201 855 n.w.2d 156 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2789648-2789648"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2791228-2791228",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2791228",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Epsteen",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-13-0961 Opinion",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2791228 us pension / defined benefit issues 2-13-0961 opinion in re marriage of epsteen qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2791228-2791228"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2792876-2792876",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2792876",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Drexler",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "245 P.3d 336",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2792876 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 245 p.3d 336 in re marriage of drexler qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2792876-2792876"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2794973-2794973",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2794973",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "M ARYLAND ET AL. v. C ARROLL T HIERGARTNER J EFFREY W ALTERS V. B ALTIMORE C OUNTY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "684 A.2d 1338",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2794973 us pension / defined benefit issues 684 a.2d 1338 m aryland et al. v. c arroll t hiergartner j effrey w alters v. b altimore c ounty qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2794973-2794973"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2795003-2795003",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2795003",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "POLLARD v. POLLARD. BENHAM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2795003 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order pollard v. pollard. benham qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2795003-2795003"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2795768-2795768",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2795768",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MARY K. BOLAND-CHAMBERS AND RYAN P. CHAMBERS Upon the Petition of MARY K. BOLAND-",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-0920",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "827 N.W.2d 671",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2795768 us pension / defined benefit issues 14-0920 827 n.w.2d 671 in re the marriage of mary k. boland-chambers and ryan p. chambers upon the petition of mary k. boland- qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2795768-2795768"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2795770-2795770",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2795770",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF LEONARD JOHN WEIS AND DIANE DOROTHY WEIS Upon the Petition of DIANE DOROTHY WEIS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-0763",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "715 N.W.2d 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2795770 us pension / defined benefit issues 14-0763 715 n.w.2d 242 in re the marriage of leonard john weis and diane dorothy weis upon the petition of diane dorothy weis qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2795770-2795770"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2797516-2797516",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2797516",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "JASON PULLIAM v. JILL IRENE PULLIAM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2797516 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order jason pulliam v. jill irene pulliam qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2797516-2797516"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2801225-2801225",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2801225",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "WBS- GGH v. HOLLISTER EMPLOYEE SHARE OWNERSHIP TRUST",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "552 U.S. 248",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2801225 us erisa / defined contribution issues 552 u.s. 248 wbs- ggh v. hollister employee share ownership trust qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2801225-2801225"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2802178-2802178",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2802178",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF LEONARD JOHN WEIS AND DIANE DOROTHY WEIS Upon the Petition of DIANE DOROTHY WEIS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-0763",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "715 N.W.2d 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2802178 us pension / defined benefit issues 14-0763 715 n.w.2d 242 in re the marriage of leonard john weis and diane dorothy weis upon the petition of diane dorothy weis qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2802178-2802178"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2803445-2803445",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2803445",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Ross",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Second District Docket No. 2-13-0961",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2803445 us pension / defined benefit issues second district docket no. 2-13-0961 in re marriage of ross qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2803445-2803445"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2805614-2805614",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2805614",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2805614",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "520 U.S. 833",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2805614 us pension / defined benefit issues 520 u.s. 833 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2805614-2805614"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2806661-2806661",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2806661",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2806661",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-0748: Complaint of Charles E. Banks. Charles Banks",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2806661 us pension / defined benefit issues 13-0748: complaint of charles e. banks. charles banks qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2806661-2806661"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2807039-2807039",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2807039",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "DHHR v. PERS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-0734 SUPREME",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2807039 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 14-0734 supreme domestic relations order dhhr v. pers qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2807039-2807039"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2807878-2807878",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2807878",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2807878",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "320 P.3d 291",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2807878 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 320 p.3d 291 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2807878-2807878"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2808372-2808372",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2808372",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2808372",
      "extracted_docket_number": "598 WDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "548 A.2d 611",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2808372 us pension / defined benefit issues 598 wda 2014 548 a.2d 611 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2808372-2808372"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2808603-2808603",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2808603",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re MARRIAGE OF Appeal from the Circuit Court LINDA ROBERTS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2808603 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of appeal from the circuit court linda roberts qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2808603-2808603"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2809390-2809390",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2809390",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2809390",
      "extracted_docket_number": "899 WDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2809390 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 899 wda 2014 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2809390-2809390"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2810655-2810655",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2810655",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Craig",
      "extracted_docket_number": "968 WDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "516 A.2d 363",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2810655 us erisa / defined contribution issues 968 wda 2014 516 a.2d 363 in re marriage of craig qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2810655-2810655"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2812301-2812301",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2812301",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2812301",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1088 MDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "979 A.2d 892",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2812301 us pension / defined benefit issues 1088 mda 2014 979 a.2d 892 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2812301-2812301"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2812807-2812807",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2812807",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DDS v. CAROLE MICHELLE LUNN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of days Husband spent with the children. The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "733 S.W.2d 102",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2812807 us pension / defined benefit issues of days husband spent with the children. the trial 733 s.w.2d 102 dds v. carole michelle lunn qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2812807-2812807"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2813071-2813071",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2813071",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of FRANKIE and GLORIA MEEK. FRANKIE MEEK",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "234 Cal.App.3d 1413",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2813071 us pension / defined benefit issues 234 cal.app.3d 1413 in re the marriage of frankie and gloria meek. frankie meek qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2813071-2813071"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2816437-2816437",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2816437",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Benson",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Fourth District Docket No. 4-14-0682",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2816437 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues fourth district docket no. 4-14-0682 domestic relations order in re marriage of benson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2816437-2816437"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2816541-2816541",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2816541",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "FROEHLICH v. FROEHLICH. NAHMIAS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2816541 us pension / defined benefit issues froehlich v. froehlich. nahmias qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2816541-2816541"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2816544-2816544",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2816544",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Fisher",
      "extracted_docket_number": "45A03-1502-DR-46 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "26 N.E.3d 1045",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2816544 us pension / defined benefit issues 45a03-1502-dr-46 v 26 n.e.3d 1045 in re marriage of fisher qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2816544-2816544"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2817594-2817594",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2817594",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2817594",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "352 S.W.3d 746",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2817594 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 352 s.w.3d 746 qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2817594-2817594"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2818524-2818524",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2818524",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "R.R.F. v. L.L.F",
      "extracted_docket_number": "25A05-1407-DR-344 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "920 N.E.2d 688",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2818524 us pension / defined benefit issues 25a05-1407-dr-344 v 920 n.e.2d 688 r.r.f. v. l.l.f qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2818524-2818524"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2820566-2820566",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2820566",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2820566",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1460 WDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "464 A.2d 1359",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2820566 us pension / defined benefit issues 1460 wda 2014 464 a.2d 1359 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2820566-2820566"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2820755-2820755",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2820755",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2820755",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "854 N.E.2d 1",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2820755 us pension / defined benefit issues 854 n.e.2d 1 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2820755-2820755"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2821447-2821447",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2821447",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hall",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "439 U.S. 572",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2821447 us pension / defined benefit issues 439 u.s. 572 in re marriage of hall qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2821447-2821447"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2822242-2822242",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2822242",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ERIC P. SOUSA v. DONNA M. SOUSA",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "50 A.3d 372",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2822242 us pension / defined benefit issues 50 a.3d 372 eric p. sousa v. donna m. sousa qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2822242-2822242"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2824168-2824168",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2824168",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF STEVEN ROSS HAECKER AND KAREN T. BLOMME Upon the Petition of STEVEN ROSS HAECKER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-1876",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "726 N.W.2d 359",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2824168 us pension / defined benefit issues 13-1876 726 n.w.2d 359 in re the marriage of steven ross haecker and karen t. blomme upon the petition of steven ross haecker qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2824168-2824168"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2824935-2824935",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2824935",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Seachrist",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2824935 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of seachrist qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2824935-2824935"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2825833-2825833",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2825833",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2825833",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "133 S.W.3d 217",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2825833 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 133 s.w.3d 217 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2825833-2825833"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2826474-2826474",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2826474",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2826474",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "340 P.3d 1242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2826474 us pension / defined benefit issues 340 p.3d 1242 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2826474-2826474"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2827077-2827077",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2827077",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2827077",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2012-29 Joint Stipulation",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2827077 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 2012-29 joint stipulation domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2827077-2827077"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2828339-2828339",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2828339",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MEDINA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. SHIRER",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2828339 us pension / defined benefit issues medina county bar association v. shirer qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2828339-2828339"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2828509-2828509",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2828509",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF DONNA L. SULLINS AND RAYMOND W. SULLINS Upon the Petition of DONNA L. SULLINS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-1153",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "715 N.W.2d 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2828509 us pension / defined benefit issues 14-1153 715 n.w.2d 242 in re the marriage of donna l. sullins and raymond w. sullins upon the petition of donna l. sullins qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2828509-2828509"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2828641-2828641",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2828641",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Shen",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-13-0733",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2828641 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1-13-0733 in re marriage of shen qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2828641-2828641"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2828906-2828906",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2828906",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of Wood Throughout most of the marriage",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Zale Wood next contends that the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "928 P.2d 1108",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2828906 us pension / defined benefit issues zale wood next contends that the trial 928 p.2d 1108 in re the marriage of wood throughout most of the marriage qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2828906-2828906"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2829941-2829941",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2829941",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2829941",
      "extracted_docket_number": "49A05-1409-DR-434 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "829 N.E.2d 476",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2829941 us pension / defined benefit issues 49a05-1409-dr-434 v 829 n.e.2d 476 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2829941-2829941"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2831053-2831053",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2831053",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2831053",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2831053 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2831053-2831053"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2847196-2847196",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2847196",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2847196",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "112 F. Supp. 2d 833",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2847196 us pension / defined benefit issues 112 f. supp. 2d 833 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2847196-2847196"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2847197-2847197",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2847197",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2847197",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2847197 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2847197-2847197"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2855618-2855618",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2855618",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Joyner",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2855618 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of joyner qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2855618-2855618"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2855619-2855619",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2855619",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Joyner",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2855619 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of joyner qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2855619-2855619"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2864919-2864919",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2864919",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2864919",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "394 S.W.2d 494",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2864919 us pension / defined benefit issues 394 s.w.2d 494 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2864919-2864919"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2869683-2869683",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2869683",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2869683",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2869683 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2869683-2869683"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2870066-2870066",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2870066",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2870066",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "717 S.W.2d 311",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2870066 us erisa / defined contribution issues 717 s.w.2d 311 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2870066-2870066"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2872017-2872017",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2872017",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2872017",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "87 S.W.3d 538",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2872017 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 87 s.w.3d 538 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2872017-2872017"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2874326-2874326",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2874326",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2874326",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2874326 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2874326-2874326"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2876345-2876345",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2876345",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2876345",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months Mr. Beyer was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2876345 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues of months mr. beyer was domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2876345-2876345"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2877444-2877444",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2877444",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2877444",
      "extracted_docket_number": "after being abated by our order of June 19",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2877444 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues after being abated by our order of june 19 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2877444-2877444"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2879692-2879692",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2879692",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2879692",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2879692 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2879692-2879692"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2881665-2881665",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2881665",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2881665",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "386 U.S. 738",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2881665 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 386 u.s. 738 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2881665-2881665"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2884433-2884433",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2884433",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2884433",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2884433 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2884433-2884433"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2884434-2884434",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2884434",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2884434",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2884434 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2884434-2884434"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2889268-2889268",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2889268",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2889268",
      "extracted_docket_number": "07-02-0421-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "216 S.W.2d 805",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2889268 us erisa / defined contribution issues 07-02-0421-cv 216 s.w.2d 805 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2889268-2889268"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2889269-2889269",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2889269",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2889269",
      "extracted_docket_number": "07-02-0421-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2889269 us erisa / defined contribution issues 07-02-0421-cv qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2889269-2889269"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2890262-2890262",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2890262",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2890262",
      "extracted_docket_number": "07-03-0445-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "671 S.W.2d 37",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2890262 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 07-03-0445-cv 671 s.w.2d 37 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2890262-2890262"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2890264-2890264",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2890264",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2890264",
      "extracted_docket_number": "07-03-0445-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "671 S.W.2d 37",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2890264 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 07-03-0445-cv 671 s.w.2d 37 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2890264-2890264"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2935963-2935963",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2935963",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CARTER v. OPM PER CURIAM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2935963 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order carter v. opm per curiam qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2935963-2935963"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2952893-2952893",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2952893",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2952893",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "168 S.W.3d 802",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2952893 us erisa / defined contribution issues 168 s.w.3d 802 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2952893-2952893"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2955992-2955992",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2955992",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2955992",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2955992 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2955992-2955992"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2956296-2956296",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2956296",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2956296",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "236 S.W.3d 343",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2956296 us pension / defined benefit issues 236 s.w.3d 343 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2956296-2956296"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2961330-2961330",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2961330",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "M.C. v. S.L",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "523 N.E.2d 332",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2961330 us erisa / defined contribution issues 523 n.e.2d 332 m.c. v. s.l qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2961330-2961330"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2966935-2966935",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2966935",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2966935",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "981 F.2d 160",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2966935 us erisa / defined contribution issues 981 f.2d 160 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2966935-2966935"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2969207-2969207",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2969207",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Adams",
      "extracted_docket_number": "49A02-1412-DR-888 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "10 N.E.3d 1005",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2969207 us pension / defined benefit issues 49a02-1412-dr-888 v 10 n.e.3d 1005 in re marriage of adams qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2969207-2969207"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2973169-2973169",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2973169",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2973169",
      "extracted_docket_number": "05-1069 UNITED STATES",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "82 F.3d 126",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2973169 us pension / defined benefit issues 05-1069 united states 82 f.3d 126 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2973169-2973169"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2976136-2976136",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2976136",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2976136",
      "extracted_docket_number": "07-5253 UNITED STATES",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "358 F.3d 408",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2976136 us pension / defined benefit issues 07-5253 united states 358 f.3d 408 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2976136-2976136"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2976977-2976977",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2976977",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2976977",
      "extracted_docket_number": "07-1914 UNITED STATES",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2976977 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 07-1914 united states 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2976977-2976977"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2980699-2980699",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2980699",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2980699",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10-6433 UNITED STATES",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2980699 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 10-6433 united states 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2980699-2980699"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2982613-2982613",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2982613",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2982613",
      "extracted_docket_number": "09-3226 UNITED STATES",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2982613 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 09-3226 united states domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2982613-2982613"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2982987-2982987",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2982987",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2982987",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-1433/1435/1436 UNITED STATES",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "716 F.3d 404",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2982987 us erisa / defined contribution issues 14-1433/1435/1436 united states 716 f.3d 404 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2982987-2982987"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2986315-2986315",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2986315",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2986315",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "148 S.W.3d 124",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2986315 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 148 s.w.3d 124 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2986315-2986315"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2991289-2991289",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2991289",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2991289",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "132 S.W.3d 126",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2991289 us pension / defined benefit issues 132 s.w.3d 126 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2991289-2991289"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3007284-3007284",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3007284",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "FREDERICK ANDERSON v. MARILYN ANDERSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "995 A.2d 1",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3007284 us pension / defined benefit issues 995 a.2d 1 frederick anderson v. marilyn anderson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3007284-3007284"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3007602-3007602",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3007602",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hall",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "439 U.S. 572",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3007602 us pension / defined benefit issues 439 u.s. 572 in re marriage of hall qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3007602-3007602"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3009079-3009079",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3009079",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3009079",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3009079 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3009079-3009079"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3014627-3014627",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3014627",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3014627",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "822 S.W.2d 427",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3014627 us pension / defined benefit issues 822 s.w.2d 427 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3014627-3014627"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3015955-3015955",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3015955",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3015955",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "802 S.W.2d 546",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3015955 us pension / defined benefit issues 802 s.w.2d 546 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3015955-3015955"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3028487-3028487",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3028487",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3028487",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3028487 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3028487-3028487"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3031149-3031149",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3031149",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3031149",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3031149 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3031149-3031149"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3031868-3031868",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3031868",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3031868",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3031868 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3031868-3031868"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3035622-3035622",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3035622",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "HAMILTON v. WASHINGTON STATE PLUMBING LINDA OPPEGAARD",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of cases in which",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "520 U.S. 833",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3035622 us pension / defined benefit issues of cases in which 520 u.s. 833 hamilton v. washington state plumbing linda oppegaard qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3035622-3035622"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3036604-3036604",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3036604",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3036604",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "346 F.3d 830",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3036604 us erisa / defined contribution issues 346 f.3d 830 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3036604-3036604"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3036704-3036704",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3036704",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "UNITED STATES v. NOVAK",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3036704 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 1056(d)(3) united states v. novak qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3036704-3036704"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3040014-3040014",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3040014",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3040014",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "508 U.S. 324",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3040014 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 508 u.s. 324 qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3040014-3040014"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3040883-3040883",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3040883",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3040883",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3040883 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3040883-3040883"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3044509-3044509",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3044509",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3044509",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2:11-cr-14051-JEM-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3044509 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 2:11-cr-14051-jem-1 united states of america 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3044509-3044509"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3047355-3047355",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3047355",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "UNITED STATES v. NOVAK",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of district",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3047355 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues of district 1056(d)(3) united states v. novak qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3047355-3047355"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3048874-3048874",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3048874",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3048874",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1:10-cv-01776-RLV KURT R. WARD",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3048874 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1:10-cv-01776-rlv kurt r. ward domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3048874-3048874"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3053294-3053294",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3053294",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CARMONA v. CARMONA JANIS CARMONA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "eight and nine. None of the previous seven wives are involved",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3053294 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues eight and nine. none of the previous seven wives are involved domestic relations order carmona v. carmona janis carmona qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3053294-3053294"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3054300-3054300",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3054300",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "OWENS v. AUTOMOTIVE MACHINISTS PENSION TRUST COUNSEL",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "778 P.2d 1022",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3054300 us pension / defined benefit issues 778 p.2d 1022 owens v. automotive machinists pension trust counsel qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3054300-3054300"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3065259-3065259",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3065259",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ANDERSON v. SUBURBAN TEAMSTERS COUNSEL",
      "extracted_docket_number": "No. 97",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "458 F.3d 955",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3065259 us pension / defined benefit issues no. 97 458 f.3d 955 anderson v. suburban teamsters counsel qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3065259-3065259"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3074111-3074111",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3074111",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3074111",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "352 S.W.3d 746",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3074111 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 352 s.w.3d 746 qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3074111-3074111"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3081412-3081412",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3081412",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3081412",
      "extracted_docket_number": "12-10-00384-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "161 S.W.3d 217",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3081412 us pension / defined benefit issues 12-10-00384-cv 161 s.w.3d 217 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3081412-3081412"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3086398-3086398",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3086398",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3086398",
      "extracted_docket_number": "05-12-01576-CV V. Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3086398 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 05-12-01576-cv v. trial domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3086398-3086398"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3092981-3092981",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3092981",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of McDonald",
      "extracted_docket_number": "equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "811 S.W.2d 542",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3092981 us erisa / defined contribution issues equalization efforts. see tex. gov 811 s.w.2d 542 in re marriage of mcdonald qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3092981-3092981"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3099143-3099143",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3099143",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3099143",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months the member has served",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3099143 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues of months the member has served domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3099143-3099143"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3100709-3100709",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3100709",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Rister",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3100709 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order in re marriage of rister qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3100709-3100709"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3101247-3101247",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3101247",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3101247",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "803 S.W.2d 711",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3101247 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 803 s.w.2d 711 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3101247-3101247"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3105739-3105739",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3105739",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3105739",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "347 S.W.3d 345",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3105739 us pension / defined benefit issues 347 s.w.3d 345 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3105739-3105739"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3108976-3108976",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3108976",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Collier",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "332 S.W.3d 361",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3108976 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 332 s.w.3d 361 in re marriage of collier qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3108976-3108976"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3113427-3113427",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3113427",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3113427",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "379 S.W.3d 267",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3113427 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 379 s.w.3d 267 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3113427-3113427"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3115444-3115444",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3115444",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of McDonald",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3115444 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order in re marriage of mcdonald qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3115444-3115444"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3116933-3116933",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3116933",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3116933",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months the member has served",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3116933 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues of months the member has served domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3116933-3116933"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3121258-3121258",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3121258",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3121258",
      "extracted_docket_number": "04-11-00898-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3121258 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 04-11-00898-cv domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3121258-3121258"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3123289-3123289",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3123289",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Joyner",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3123289 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of joyner qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3123289-3123289"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3127571-3127571",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3127571",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "L.L.C. v. SOS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3127571 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order l.l.c. v. sos qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3127571-3127571"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3127913-3127913",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3127913",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3127913",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "221 S.W.3d 622",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3127913 us pension / defined benefit issues 221 s.w.3d 622 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3127913-3127913"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3130837-3130837",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3130837",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hayes",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3130837 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of hayes qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3130837-3130837"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3131465-3131465",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3131465",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "FROEHLICH v. FROEHLICH. NAHMIAS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3131465 us pension / defined benefit issues froehlich v. froehlich. nahmias qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3131465-3131465"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3131568-3131568",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3131568",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "POLLARD v. POLLARD. BENHAM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3131568 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order pollard v. pollard. benham qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3131568-3131568"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3133284-3133284",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3133284",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3133284",
      "extracted_docket_number": "41013-2013 STEPHANIE M. REED",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "320 P.3d 1244",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3133284 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 41013-2013 stephanie m. reed 320 p.3d 1244 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3133284-3133284"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3133447-3133447",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3133447",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3133447",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "148 S.W.3d 761",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3133447 us pension / defined benefit issues 148 s.w.3d 761 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3133447-3133447"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3134661-3134661",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3134661",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Scott",
      "extracted_docket_number": "88352–Agenda 17–March 2000. DELORES SMITHBERG",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3134661 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 88352–agenda 17–march 2000. delores smithberg domestic relations order in re marriage of scott qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3134661-3134661"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3138182-3138182",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3138182",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3138182",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "660 N.E.2d 157",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3138182 us pension / defined benefit issues 660 n.e.2d 157 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3138182-3138182"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3138617-3138617",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3138617",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3138617",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4-98-0690",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3138617 us pension / defined benefit issues 4-98-0690 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3138617-3138617"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3140057-3140057",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3140057",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3140057",
      "extracted_docket_number": "5-01-0939",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3140057 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 5-01-0939 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3140057-3140057"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3140221-3140221",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3140221",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3140221",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3140221 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3140221-3140221"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3140560-3140560",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3140560",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3140560",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4-03-0015",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3140560 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 4-03-0015 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3140560-3140560"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3141433-3141433",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3141433",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Thomas",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3141433 us pension / defined benefit issues in re marriage of thomas qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3141433-3141433"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3143322-3143322",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3143322",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3143322",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3143322 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3143322-3143322"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3144818-3144818",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3144818",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Jensen",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Fourth District Docket No. 4-12-0355",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "857 N.E.2d 332",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3144818 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues fourth district docket no. 4-12-0355 857 n.e.2d 332 in re marriage of jensen qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3144818-3144818"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3145522-3145522",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3145522",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Radzik",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Second District Docket No. 2-10-0374",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3145522 us pension / defined benefit issues second district docket no. 2-10-0374 in re marriage of radzik qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3145522-3145522"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3145599-3145599",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3145599",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hall",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3145599 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues in re marriage of hall qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3145599-3145599"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3145702-3145702",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3145702",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Schinelli",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3145702 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order in re marriage of schinelli qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3145702-3145702"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3147152-3147152",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3147152",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Abma",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-07-0417 Appellate",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "720 N.E.2d 645",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3147152 us pension / defined benefit issues 1-07-0417 appellate 720 n.e.2d 645 in re marriage of abma qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3147152-3147152"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3147828-3147828",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3147828",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3147828",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3147828 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3147828-3147828"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3148212-3148212",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3148212",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Kehoe",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-11-0644",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3148212 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1-11-0644 domestic relations order in re marriage of kehoe qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3148212-3148212"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3148325-3148325",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3148325",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Winter",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-11-2836 Rule 23 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3148325 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1-11-2836 rule 23 order domestic relations order in re marriage of winter qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3148325-3148325"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3148924-3148924",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3148924",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3148924",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3148924 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3148924-3148924"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3150147-3150147",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3150147",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MARYANN S. PETESICH AND JOHN A. PETESICH Upon the Petition of MARYANN S. PETESICH",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-2148",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "858 N.W.2d 402",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3150147 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 14-2148 858 n.w.2d 402 in re the marriage of maryann s. petesich and john a. petesich upon the petition of maryann s. petesich qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3150147-3150147"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3151509-3151509",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3151509",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hansen",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "828 N.W.2d 109",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3151509 us pension / defined benefit issues 828 n.w.2d 109 in re marriage of hansen qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3151509-3151509"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3152047-3152047",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3152047",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Padgett",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of issues presented on",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "172 Cal.App.4th 830",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3152047 us pension / defined benefit issues of issues presented on 172 cal.app.4th 830 in re marriage of padgett qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3152047-3152047"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3152701-3152701",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3152701",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3152701",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3152701 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3152701-3152701"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3153311-3153311",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3153311",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3153311",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months respondent worked. The record before this",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "331 N.W.2d 752",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3153311 us pension / defined benefit issues of months respondent worked. the record before this 331 n.w.2d 752 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3153311-3153311"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3154948-3154948",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3154948",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3154948",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "77 P.3d 285",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3154948 us pension / defined benefit issues 77 p.3d 285 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3154948-3154948"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3159362-3159362",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3159362",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of Howell",
      "extracted_docket_number": "CV-15-0030-PR",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "490 U.S. 581",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3159362 us pension / defined benefit issues cv-15-0030-pr 490 u.s. 581 in re the marriage of howell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3159362-3159362"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3161144-3161144",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3161144",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JOSEPH VINCENT COLARUSSO AND KARYL JEAN COLARUSSO Upon the Petition of JOSEPH",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15-0177",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "810 N.W.2d 880",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3161144 us pension / defined benefit issues 15-0177 810 n.w.2d 880 in re the marriage of joseph vincent colarusso and karyl jean colarusso upon the petition of joseph qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3161144-3161144"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3161942-3161942",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3161942",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "C.R.B. v. C.C",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "989 P.2d 1281",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3161942 us pension / defined benefit issues 989 p.2d 1281 c.r.b. v. c.c qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3161942-3161942"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3162487-3162487",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3162487",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3162487",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA15-209",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3162487 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues coa15-209 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3162487-3162487"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3162541-3162541",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3162541",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3162541",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1805. Wife agrees that the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "536 S.W.2d 30",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3162541 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1805. wife agrees that the trial 536 s.w.2d 30 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3162541-3162541"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3164292-3164292",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3164292",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3164292",
      "extracted_docket_number": "H-15-008 Appellee Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "671 N.E.2d 236",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3164292 us pension / defined benefit issues h-15-008 appellee trial 671 n.e.2d 236 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3164292-3164292"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3165740-3165740",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3165740",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3165740",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3520 EDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3165740 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 3520 eda 2014 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3165740-3165740"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3166192-3166192",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3166192",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3166192",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1: The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "461 N.E.2d 1273",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3166192 us pension / defined benefit issues 1: the trial 461 n.e.2d 1273 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3166192-3166192"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3168428-3168428",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3168428",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3168428",
      "extracted_docket_number": "322257 Calhoun Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3168428 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 322257 calhoun circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3168428-3168428"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3169181-3169181",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3169181",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3169181",
      "extracted_docket_number": "49A02-1501-DR-51 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3169181 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 49a02-1501-dr-51 v domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3169181-3169181"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3169210-3169210",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3169210",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MARY KAY FRARY AND DANIEL L. KNIPPER Upon the Petition of MARY KAY FRARY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-1398",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "832 N.W.2d 663",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3169210 us pension / defined benefit issues 14-1398 832 n.w.2d 663 in re the marriage of mary kay frary and daniel l. knipper upon the petition of mary kay frary qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3169210-3169210"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3169706-3169706",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3169706",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3169706",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "450 N.E.2d 1140",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3169706 us pension / defined benefit issues 450 n.e.2d 1140 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3169706-3169706"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3169896-3169896",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3169896",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "S.V. v. R.V",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "369 S.W.3d 918",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3169896 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 369 s.w.3d 918 s.v. v. r.v qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3169896-3169896"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3174702-3174702",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3174702",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3174702",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "133 S.W.3d 277",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3174702 us pension / defined benefit issues 133 s.w.3d 277 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3174702-3174702"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3177444-3177444",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3177444",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3177444",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "980 N.E.2d 363",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3177444 us pension / defined benefit issues 980 n.e.2d 363 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3177444-3177444"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3178511-3178511",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3178511",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MAGALLANES v. MAGALLANES",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 14-0534 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3178511 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 14-0534 fc magallanes v. magallanes qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3178511-3178511"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3178995-3178995",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3178995",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3178995",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "331 N.W.2d 752",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3178995 us pension / defined benefit issues 331 n.w.2d 752 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3178995-3178995"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3180906-3180906",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3180906",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3180906",
      "extracted_docket_number": "394 WDA 2015",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "982 A.2d 1230",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3180906 us pension / defined benefit issues 394 wda 2015 982 a.2d 1230 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3180906-3180906"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3183182-3183182",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3183182",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3183182",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3183182 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3183182-3183182"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3183829-3183829",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3183829",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3183829",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3183829 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3183829-3183829"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3185044-3185044",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3185044",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3185044",
      "extracted_docket_number": "619 MDA 2015",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "633 A.2d 589",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3185044 us pension / defined benefit issues 619 mda 2015 633 a.2d 589 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3185044-3185044"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3188202-3188202",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3188202",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Thomas",
      "extracted_docket_number": "42875 LINDA C. KESTING",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "302 P.3d 357",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3188202 us pension / defined benefit issues 42875 linda c. kesting 302 p.3d 357 in re marriage of thomas qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3188202-3188202"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3191315-3191315",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3191315",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3191315",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA15-253",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3191315 us pension / defined benefit issues coa15-253 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3191315-3191315"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3192113-3192113",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3192113",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3192113",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3192113 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3192113-3192113"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3192275-3192275",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3192275",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3192275",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-15-507",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "858 N.W.2d 865",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3192275 us pension / defined benefit issues a-15-507 858 n.w.2d 865 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3192275-3192275"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3193693-3193693",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3193693",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Dixon",
      "extracted_docket_number": "sheet in Cause No. 27",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "464 S.W.3d 801",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3193693 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues sheet in cause no. 27 464 s.w.3d 801 in re marriage of dixon qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3193693-3193693"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3195296-3195296",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3195296",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "RICHARD JERONIMUS v. ZOILA MARIA JERONIMUS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2014-02207-COA-R3-CV –",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "211 S.W.3d 216",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3195296 us pension / defined benefit issues m2014-02207-coa-r3-cv – 211 s.w.3d 216 richard jeronimus v. zoila maria jeronimus qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3195296-3195296"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3195360-3195360",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3195360",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3195360",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA15-185",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "487 U.S. 312",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3195360 us pension / defined benefit issues coa15-185 487 u.s. 312 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3195360-3195360"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3196650-3196650",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3196650",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3196650",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1039 WDA 2015",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3196650 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1039 wda 2015 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3196650-3196650"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3197762-3197762",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3197762",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "BACKUS v. BACKUS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 14-0649 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3197762 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 14-0649 fc backus v. backus qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3197762-3197762"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3198279-3198279",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3198279",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3198279",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "90 S.W.3d 10",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3198279 us erisa / defined contribution issues 90 s.w.3d 10 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3198279-3198279"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3198632-3198632",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3198632",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3198632",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1147 MDA 2015",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "859 A.2d 511",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3198632 us pension / defined benefit issues 1147 mda 2015 859 a.2d 511 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3198632-3198632"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3198639-3198639",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3198639",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "TRKULA v. TRKULA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 15-0598 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3198639 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 15-0598 fc trkula v. trkula qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3198639-3198639"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3200167-3200167",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3200167",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3200167",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3200167 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3200167-3200167"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3201139-3201139",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3201139",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Nolder",
      "extracted_docket_number": "sheet that Holoubek was entitled to 35",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "976 S.W.2d 856",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3201139 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues sheet that holoubek was entitled to 35 976 s.w.2d 856 in re marriage of nolder qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3201139-3201139"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3202604-3202604",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3202604",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JULIA HEATH-CLARK AND RICHARD ALAN CLARK Upon the Petition of JULIA HEATH-CLARK",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15-0525",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "690 N.W.2d 279",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3202604 us pension / defined benefit issues 15-0525 690 n.w.2d 279 in re the marriage of julia heath-clark and richard alan clark upon the petition of julia heath-clark qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3202604-3202604"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3202606-3202606",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3202606",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF DONALD L. SEALS AND JACQUELYN F. MIHM SEALS Upon the Petition of DONALD L. SEALS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-1348",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3202606 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 14-1348 domestic relations order in re the marriage of donald l. seals and jacquelyn f. mihm seals upon the petition of donald l. seals qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3202606-3202606"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3203256-3203256",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3203256",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3203256",
      "extracted_docket_number": "324146 Van Buren Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "487 F3d 317",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3203256 us pension / defined benefit issues 324146 van buren circuit 487 f3d 317 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3203256-3203256"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3203286-3203286",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3203286",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SICKLER v. SICKLER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "S-15-594. 1. Contempt:",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "808 N.W.2d 867",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3203286 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues s-15-594. 1. contempt: 808 n.w.2d 867 sickler v. sickler qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3203286-3203286"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3203370-3203370",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3203370",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3203370",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "249 P.3d 1070",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3203370 us pension / defined benefit issues 249 p.3d 1070 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3203370-3203370"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3205258-3205258",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3205258",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of CYNTHIA",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "203 Cal.App.3d 705",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3205258 us pension / defined benefit issues 203 cal.app.3d 705 in re the marriage of cynthia qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3205258-3205258"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3206207-3206207",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3206207",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JACKSON v. MATTHEWS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 15-0096 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "424 U.S. 319",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3206207 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1 ca-cv 15-0096 fc 424 u.s. 319 jackson v. matthews qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3206207-3206207"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3207206-3207206",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3207206",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3207206",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3207206 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3207206-3207206"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3207224-3207224",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3207224",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "THOMPSON v. THOMPSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 15-0596 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "892 P.2d 1053",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3207224 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 15-0596 fc 892 p.2d 1053 thompson v. thompson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3207224-3207224"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3207873-3207873",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3207873",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Fisher",
      "extracted_docket_number": "34A02-1509-DR-1433 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "44 N.E.3d 721",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3207873 us pension / defined benefit issues 34a02-1509-dr-1433 v 44 n.e.3d 721 in re marriage of fisher qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3207873-3207873"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3208741-3208741",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3208741",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3208741",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3208741 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3208741-3208741"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3208870-3208870",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3208870",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CARRANZA v. GONZALES",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 15-0148 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "9 P.3d 1046",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3208870 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 15-0148 fc 9 p.3d 1046 carranza v. gonzales qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3208870-3208870"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3209199-3209199",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3209199",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3209199",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3209199 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3209199-3209199"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3210648-3210648",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3210648",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3210648",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3210648 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3210648-3210648"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3211267-3211267",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3211267",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3211267",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of monthly checks",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "335 N.W.2d 503",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3211267 us pension / defined benefit issues of monthly checks 335 n.w.2d 503 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3211267-3211267"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3213433-3213433",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3213433",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF SETH H. CRAWFORD AND TRICIA L. FAIRCHILD Upon the Petition of SETH H. CRAWFORD",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15-1694",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "827 N.W.2d 671",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3213433 us pension / defined benefit issues 15-1694 827 n.w.2d 671 in re the marriage of seth h. crawford and tricia l. fairchild upon the petition of seth h. crawford qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3213433-3213433"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3214258-3214258",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3214258",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3214258",
      "extracted_docket_number": "324105 Delta Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "397 F3d 103",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3214258 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 324105 delta circuit 397 f3d 103 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3214258-3214258"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3214585-3214585",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3214585",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3214585",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "873 S.W.2d 368",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3214585 us pension / defined benefit issues 873 s.w.2d 368 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3214585-3214585"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3215890-3215890",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3215890",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3215890",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3215890 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3215890-3215890"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3218794-3218794",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3218794",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Nickels",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "900 N.E.2d 454",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3218794 us pension / defined benefit issues 900 n.e.2d 454 in re marriage of nickels qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3218794-3218794"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3219053-3219053",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3219053",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3219053",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Q. And there is a paragraph",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3219053 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues q. and there is a paragraph domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3219053-3219053"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3261018-3261018",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3261018",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3261018",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3261018 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3261018-3261018"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-33223-33223",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 33223",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 33223",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "936 F.2d 777",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 33223 us erisa / defined contribution issues 936 f.2d 777 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-33223-33223"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3324125-3324125",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3324125",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3324125",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3324125 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3324125-3324125"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3324650-3324650",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3324650",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3324650",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3324650 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3324650-3324650"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3327834-3327834",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3327834",
      "citation": "QUALIFIED DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3327834",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3327834 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3327834-3327834"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3329464-3329464",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3329464",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3329464",
      "extracted_docket_number": "to contact them mindful of the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3329464 us pension / defined benefit issues to contact them mindful of the qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3329464-3329464"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3331381-3331381",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3331381",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3331381",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3331381 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3331381-3331381"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3332160-3332160",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3332160",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3332160",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3332160 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3332160-3332160"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3332493-3332493",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3332493",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3332493",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3332493 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3332493-3332493"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3333850-3333850",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3333850",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3333850",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3333850 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3333850-3333850"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3334555-3334555",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3334555",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3334555",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3334555 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3334555-3334555"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3335137-3335137",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3335137",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3335137",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3335137 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3335137-3335137"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3335206-3335206",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3335206",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3335206",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3335206 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3335206-3335206"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3336550-3336550",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3336550",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3336550",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3336550 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3336550-3336550"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3337114-3337114",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3337114",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3337114",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3337114 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3337114-3337114"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3338233-3338233",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3338233",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3338233",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3338233 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3338233-3338233"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3338238-3338238",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3338238",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3338238",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3338238 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3338238-3338238"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3338763-3338763",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3338763",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3338763",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3338763 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3338763-3338763"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3341299-3341299",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3341299",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3341299",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3341299 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3341299-3341299"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3342797-3342797",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3342797",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3342797",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3342797 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3342797-3342797"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3343623-3343623",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3343623",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3343623",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3343623 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3343623-3343623"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3344362-3344362",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3344362",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3344362",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3344362 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3344362-3344362"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3344516-3344516",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3344516",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3344516",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3344516 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3344516-3344516"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3345063-3345063",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3345063",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3345063",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3345063 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3345063-3345063"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3345626-3345626",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3345626",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3345626",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3345626 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3345626-3345626"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3345867-3345867",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3345867",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3345867",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3345867 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3345867-3345867"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3348061-3348061",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3348061",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3348061",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3348061 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3348061-3348061"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3349292-3349292",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3349292",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3349292",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3349292 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3349292-3349292"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3349665-3349665",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3349665",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3349665",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "459 A.2d 523",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3349665 us pension / defined benefit issues 459 a.2d 523 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3349665-3349665"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3352168-3352168",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3352168",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3352168",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3352168 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3352168-3352168"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3352364-3352364",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3352364",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3352364",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3352364 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3352364-3352364"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3352626-3352626",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3352626",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3352626",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3352626 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3352626-3352626"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3352694-3352694",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3352694",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3352694",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3352694 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3352694-3352694"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3355114-3355114",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3355114",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3355114",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3355114 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3355114-3355114"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3355813-3355813",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3355813",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3355813",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3355813 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3355813-3355813"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3357420-3357420",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3357420",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3357420",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3357420 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3357420-3357420"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3358224-3358224",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3358224",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3358224",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3358224 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3358224-3358224"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3358365-3358365",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3358365",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3358365",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3358365 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3358365-3358365"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3358811-3358811",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3358811",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3358811",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3358811 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3358811-3358811"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3361101-3361101",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3361101",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3361101",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3361101 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3361101-3361101"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3361108-3361108",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3361108",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3361108",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3361108 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3361108-3361108"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3362995-3362995",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3362995",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3362995",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3362995 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3362995-3362995"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3363246-3363246",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3363246",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3363246",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3363246 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3363246-3363246"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3363340-3363340",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3363340",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3363340",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3363340 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3363340-3363340"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3363463-3363463",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3363463",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3363463",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3363463 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3363463-3363463"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3364125-3364125",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3364125",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3364125",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3364125 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3364125-3364125"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3365249-3365249",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3365249",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3365249",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3365249 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3365249-3365249"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3365787-3365787",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3365787",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3365787",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3365787 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3365787-3365787"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3367625-3367625",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3367625",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3367625",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3367625 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3367625-3367625"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3369712-3369712",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3369712",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3369712",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Number CV 960565689S. By pleading dated November 20",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3369712 us pension / defined benefit issues number cv 960565689s. by pleading dated november 20 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3369712-3369712"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3371661-3371661",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3371661",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3371661",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3371661 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3371661-3371661"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3685977-3685977",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3685977",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3685977",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3685977 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3685977-3685977"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3686983-3686983",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3686983",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3686983",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "559 N.E.2d 1292",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3686983 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 559 n.e.2d 1292 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3686983-3686983"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3687877-3687877",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3687877",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3687877",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3687877 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3687877-3687877"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3692129-3692129",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3692129",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3692129",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3692129 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3692129-3692129"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3694046-3694046",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3694046",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3694046",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3694046 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3694046-3694046"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3698319-3698319",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3698319",
      "citation": "DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3698319",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3698319 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3698319-3698319"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3701248-3701248",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3701248",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3701248",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3701248 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3701248-3701248"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3703077-3703077",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3703077",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3703077",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3703077 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3703077-3703077"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3705594-3705594",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3705594",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3705594",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3705594 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3705594-3705594"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3707252-3707252",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3707252",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3707252",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3707252 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3707252-3707252"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3709220-3709220",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3709220",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3709220",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3709220 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3709220-3709220"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3712310-3712310",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3712310",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3712310",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3712310 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3712310-3712310"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3715373-3715373",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3715373",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3715373",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3715373 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3715373-3715373"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3717862-3717862",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3717862",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3717862",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3717862 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3717862-3717862"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3717864-3717864",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3717864",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3717864",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3717864 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3717864-3717864"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3720555-3720555",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3720555",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3720555",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3720555 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3720555-3720555"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3724526-3724526",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3724526",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3724526",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3724526 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3724526-3724526"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3725659-3725659",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3725659",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3725659",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3725659 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3725659-3725659"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3727525-3727525",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3727525",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3727525",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3727525 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3727525-3727525"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3728942-3728942",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3728942",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3728942",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3728942 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3728942-3728942"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3733576-3733576",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3733576",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3733576",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3733576 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3733576-3733576"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3735597-3735597",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3735597",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3735597",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3735597 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3735597-3735597"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3740576-3740576",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3740576",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3740576",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3740576 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3740576-3740576"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3744325-3744325",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3744325",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3744325",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3744325 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3744325-3744325"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3755662-3755662",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3755662",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3755662",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3755662 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3755662-3755662"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3764034-3764034",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3764034",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3764034",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3764034 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3764034-3764034"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3765305-3765305",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3765305",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3765305",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3765305 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3765305-3765305"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3767769-3767769",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3767769",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3767769",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3767769 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3767769-3767769"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3771815-3771815",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3771815",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3771815",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3771815 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3771815-3771815"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3773143-3773143",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3773143",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3773143",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3773143 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3773143-3773143"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3776863-3776863",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3776863",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3776863",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3776863 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3776863-3776863"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3779213-3779213",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3779213",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3779213",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3779213 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3779213-3779213"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-38070-38070",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 38070",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 38070",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "379 F.3d 177",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 38070 us pension / defined benefit issues 379 f.3d 177 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-38070-38070"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4013741-4013741",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4013741",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Preston",
      "extracted_docket_number": "42A01-1508-DR-1255 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "24 N.E.3d 1007",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4013741 us pension / defined benefit issues 42a01-1508-dr-1255 v 24 n.e.3d 1007 in re marriage of preston qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4013741-4013741"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4017078-4017078",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4017078",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4017078",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years that the spouse was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4017078 us pension / defined benefit issues of years that the spouse was qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4017078-4017078"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4020692-4020692",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4020692",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4020692",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2093-15-4 SHAWN D. PEDERSON FROM THE CIRCUIT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4020692 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 2093-15-4 shawn d. pederson from the circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4020692-4020692"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4020693-4020693",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4020693",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4020693",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2093-15-4 SHAWN D. PEDERSON FROM THE CIRCUIT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4020693 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 2093-15-4 shawn d. pederson from the circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4020693-4020693"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4020906-4020906",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4020906",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Crow and Gilmore",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "536 S.W.2d 30",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4020906 us pension / defined benefit issues 536 s.w.2d 30 in re marriage of crow and gilmore qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4020906-4020906"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4021003-4021003",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4021003",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4021003",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "509 F.3d 173",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4021003 us pension / defined benefit issues 509 f.3d 173 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4021003-4021003"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4023877-4023877",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4023877",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4023877",
      "extracted_docket_number": "26921 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "635 N.E.2d 308",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4023877 us pension / defined benefit issues 26921 : v. : trial 635 n.e.2d 308 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4023877-4023877"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4025078-4025078",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4025078",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "W.A.M. v. S.P.C",
      "extracted_docket_number": "252 WDA 2016 : RAYMOND D. ANTHONY :",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "95 A.3d 349",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4025078 us pension / defined benefit issues 252 wda 2016 : raymond d. anthony : 95 a.3d 349 w.a.m. v. s.p.c qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4025078-4025078"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4025883-4025883",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4025883",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MELISSA A. GANSEN BEAUCHAMP AND CORY J. BEAUCHAMP Upon the Petition of MELISSA A",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15-0107",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "824 N.W.2d 481",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4025883 us pension / defined benefit issues 15-0107 824 n.w.2d 481 in re the marriage of melissa a. gansen beauchamp and cory j. beauchamp upon the petition of melissa a qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4025883-4025883"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4026742-4026742",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4026742",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4026742",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of the final judgment",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "799 A.2d 345",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4026742 us pension / defined benefit issues of the final judgment 799 a.2d 345 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4026742-4026742"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4027505-4027505",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4027505",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4027505",
      "extracted_docket_number": "208-6-11 Wndm Trial Judge: Thomas J. Devine",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4027505 us pension / defined benefit issues 208-6-11 wndm trial judge: thomas j. devine qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4027505-4027505"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4028365-4028365",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4028365",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ERIC P. SOUSA v. DONNA M. SOUSA",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "422 A.2d 271",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4028365 us pension / defined benefit issues 422 a.2d 271 eric p. sousa v. donna m. sousa qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4028365-4028365"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4030508-4030508",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4030508",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Ard",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "414 S.W.3d 288",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4030508 us erisa / defined contribution issues 414 s.w.3d 288 in re marriage of ard qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4030508-4030508"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4033606-4033606",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4033606",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF SARA ROSE CRANDALL AND JONATHAN CHRISTIAN CRANDALL Upon the Petition of SARA ROSE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15-1783",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "715 N.W.2d 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4033606 us erisa / defined contribution issues 15-1783 715 n.w.2d 242 in re the marriage of sara rose crandall and jonathan christian crandall upon the petition of sara rose qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4033606-4033606"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4033607-4033607",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4033607",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF KAREN K. KORN AND JOHN C. KORN Upon the Petition of KAREN K. KORN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15-2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "874 N.W.2d 103",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4033607 us pension / defined benefit issues 15-2014 874 n.w.2d 103 in re the marriage of karen k. korn and john c. korn upon the petition of karen k. korn qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4033607-4033607"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4035344-4035344",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4035344",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hunt",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "567 F.2d 1252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4035344 us pension / defined benefit issues 567 f.2d 1252 in re marriage of hunt qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4035344-4035344"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4036750-4036750",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4036750",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of O'Malley",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4036750 us pension / defined benefit issues in re marriage of o'malley qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4036750-4036750"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4037924-4037924",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4037924",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JESSE JACOB LEIB AND ABBY JO LEIB Upon the Petition of JESSE JACOB LEIB",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15-1918",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "824 N.W.2d 481",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4037924 us pension / defined benefit issues 15-1918 824 n.w.2d 481 in re the marriage of jesse jacob leib and abby jo leib upon the petition of jesse jacob leib qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4037924-4037924"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4042719-4042719",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4042719",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4042719",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-15-00150-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4042719 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13-15-00150-cv domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4042719-4042719"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4044353-4044353",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4044353",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Moncey",
      "extracted_docket_number": "06-14-00101-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "286 S.W.3d 619",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4044353 us pension / defined benefit issues 06-14-00101-cv 286 s.w.3d 619 in re marriage of moncey qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4044353-4044353"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4046778-4046778",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4046778",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4046778",
      "extracted_docket_number": "06-14-00101-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "133 S.W.3d 782",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4046778 us pension / defined benefit issues 06-14-00101-cv 133 s.w.3d 782 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4046778-4046778"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4047899-4047899",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4047899",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "APPELLANT v. TRISHA DUNAHOO",
      "extracted_docket_number": "07-15-00029-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4047899 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 07-15-00029-cv domestic relations order appellant v. trisha dunahoo qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4047899-4047899"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4049333-4049333",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4049333",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4049333",
      "extracted_docket_number": "01-14-00761-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "301 S.W.3d 74",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4049333 us pension / defined benefit issues 01-14-00761-cv 301 s.w.3d 74 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4049333-4049333"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4052374-4052374",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4052374",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4052374",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2012-65951 MEMORANDUM OPINION Barbara White",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "87 S.W.3d 538",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4052374 us pension / defined benefit issues 2012-65951 memorandum opinion barbara white 87 s.w.3d 538 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4052374-4052374"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4062993-4062993",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4062993",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4062993",
      "extracted_docket_number": "sheet on the samedate",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "687 S.W.2d 42",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4062993 us pension / defined benefit issues sheet on the samedate 687 s.w.2d 42 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4062993-4062993"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4063996-4063996",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4063996",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4063996",
      "extracted_docket_number": "06-15-0041-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "582 S.W.2d 883",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4063996 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 06-15-0041-cv 582 s.w.2d 883 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4063996-4063996"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4065578-4065578",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4065578",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4065578",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entry. The court ordered that Husband be released f",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "41 S.W.3d 470",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4065578 us pension / defined benefit issues entry. the court ordered that husband be released f 41 s.w.3d 470 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4065578-4065578"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4070471-4070471",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4070471",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4070471",
      "extracted_docket_number": "7295801 By: Raven Hubbard",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4070471 us erisa / defined contribution issues 7295801 by: raven hubbard qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4070471-4070471"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4070475-4070475",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4070475",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "S.V. v. R.V",
      "extracted_docket_number": "03-15-00008-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "806 S.W.2d 791",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4070475 us pension / defined benefit issues 03-15-00008-cv 806 s.w.2d 791 s.v. v. r.v qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4070475-4070475"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4084393-4084393",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4084393",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4084393",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4084393 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4084393-4084393"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4084788-4084788",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4084788",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4084788",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4084788 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4084788-4084788"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4087651-4087651",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4087651",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4087651",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4087651 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4087651-4087651"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4089617-4089617",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4089617",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4089617",
      "extracted_docket_number": "324853 Dickinson Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4089617 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 324853 dickinson circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4089617-4089617"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4089822-4089822",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4089822",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4089822",
      "extracted_docket_number": "329152 Marquette Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4089822 us pension / defined benefit issues 329152 marquette circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4089822-4089822"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4090163-4090163",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4090163",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LEANN BARNES v. DAVID ELLETT BARNES",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2015-01254-COA-R3-CV –",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "975 S.W.2d 303",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4090163 us erisa / defined contribution issues m2015-01254-coa-r3-cv – 975 s.w.2d 303 leann barnes v. david ellett barnes qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4090163-4090163"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4091129-4091129",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4091129",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Wood",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2015-0430",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "104 N.E.2d 877",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4091129 us pension / defined benefit issues 2015-0430 104 n.e.2d 877 in re estate of wood qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4091129-4091129"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4092488-4092488",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4092488",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "SESSIONS v. SESSIONS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 15-0589 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4092488 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 15-0589 fc domestic relations order sessions v. sessions qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4092488-4092488"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4095608-4095608",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4095608",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "L.L.C. v. U.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": "27011 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "378 N.E.2d 162",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4095608 us pension / defined benefit issues 27011 : v. : trial 378 n.e.2d 162 l.l.c. v. u.s qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4095608-4095608"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4095712-4095712",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4095712",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4095712",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1815 EDA 2015",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4095712 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1815 eda 2015 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4095712-4095712"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4095930-4095930",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4095930",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of THOMAS P. HARKEMA. PAMELA HARKEMA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "328250 Shiawassee Probate",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4095930 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 328250 shiawassee probate domestic relations order in re estate of thomas p. harkema. pamela harkema qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4095930-4095930"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4101239-4101239",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4101239",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Sanders",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-14-3681",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "60 F.3d 346",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4101239 us pension / defined benefit issues 1-14-3681 60 f.3d 346 in re marriage of sanders qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4101239-4101239"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4102200-4102200",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4102200",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4102200",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2190 MDA 2015",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "530 A.2d 871",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4102200 us pension / defined benefit issues 2190 mda 2015 530 a.2d 871 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4102200-4102200"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4102745-4102745",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4102745",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4102745",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-15-1234",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "866 N.W.2d 74",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4102745 us pension / defined benefit issues a-15-1234 866 n.w.2d 74 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4102745-4102745"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4106144-4106144",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4106144",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of O'Malley",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-15-1118",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4106144 us pension / defined benefit issues 1-15-1118 in re marriage of o'malley qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4106144-4106144"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4106617-4106617",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4106617",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4106617",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "568 N.W.2d 705",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4106617 us pension / defined benefit issues 568 n.w.2d 705 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4106617-4106617"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4109227-4109227",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4109227",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4109227",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20160159",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4109227 us pension / defined benefit issues 20160159 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4109227-4109227"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4110439-4110439",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4110439",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Cella",
      "extracted_docket_number": "827 MDA 2016 DENNIS J. LYONS :",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4110439 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 827 mda 2016 dennis j. lyons : domestic relations order in re estate of cella qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4110439-4110439"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4112301-4112301",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4112301",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Knoerr",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-15-0774 Opinion",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "806 F.3d 414",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4112301 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2-15-0774 opinion 806 f.3d 414 in re marriage of knoerr qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4112301-4112301"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4112469-4112469",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4112469",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4112469",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4112469 us pension / defined benefit issues 477 u.s. 242 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4112469-4112469"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4114096-4114096",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4114096",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4114096",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16CA0029-M Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4114096 us pension / defined benefit issues 16ca0029-m appellee v qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4114096-4114096"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4114523-4114523",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4114523",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4114523",
      "extracted_docket_number": "33593-3-III Veneziano v. Chvatal the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4114523 us pension / defined benefit issues 33593-3-iii veneziano v. chvatal the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4114523-4114523"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4115105-4115105",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4115105",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4115105",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4115105 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4115105-4115105"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4115614-4115614",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4115614",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4115614",
      "extracted_docket_number": "32A04-1604-CT-806 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "40 N.E.3d 971",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4115614 us pension / defined benefit issues 32a04-1604-ct-806 v 40 n.e.3d 971 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4115614-4115614"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4115913-4115913",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4115913",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Dalton",
      "extracted_docket_number": "12-15-00203-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "348 S.W.3d 290",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4115913 us pension / defined benefit issues 12-15-00203-cv 348 s.w.3d 290 in re marriage of dalton qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4115913-4115913"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4118369-4118369",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4118369",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF BRIAN K. SMITH AND BONNIE J. SMITH Upon the Petition of BRIAN K. SMITH",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-0597",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "827 N.W.2d 671",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4118369 us pension / defined benefit issues 16-0597 827 n.w.2d 671 in re the marriage of brian k. smith and bonnie j. smith upon the petition of brian k. smith qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4118369-4118369"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4124406-4124406",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4124406",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JAMIE TEKIPPE n",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-1297",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "810 N.W.2d 880",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4124406 us pension / defined benefit issues 16-1297 810 n.w.2d 880 in re the marriage of jamie tekippe n qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4124406-4124406"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4126102-4126102",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4126102",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4126102",
      "extracted_docket_number": "329377 Macomb Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4126102 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 329377 macomb circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4126102-4126102"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4126576-4126576",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4126576",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4126576",
      "extracted_docket_number": "329377 Macomb Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4126576 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 329377 macomb circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4126576-4126576"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4151610-4151610",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4151610",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4151610",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15AP-1071 for this",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4151610 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 15ap-1071 for this domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4151610-4151610"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4151729-4151729",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4151729",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "P.A. v. T.A",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4151729 us pension / defined benefit issues p.a. v. t.a qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4151729-4151729"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4153347-4153347",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4153347",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4153347",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months Matthews was a participant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "22 A.3d 727",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4153347 us pension / defined benefit issues of months matthews was a participant 22 a.3d 727 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4153347-4153347"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4153742-4153742",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4153742",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4153742",
      "extracted_docket_number": "OT-16-017 Appellant Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "654 N.E.2d 1254",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4153742 us erisa / defined contribution issues ot-16-017 appellant trial 654 n.e.2d 1254 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4153742-4153742"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4153750-4153750",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4153750",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "DDP-AJW v. DIRECTORS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4153750 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order ddp-ajw v. directors qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4153750-4153750"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4154006-4154006",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4154006",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4154006",
      "extracted_docket_number": "32. Both parties now move for summary judgment. The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4154006 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 32. both parties now move for summary judgment. the domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4154006-4154006"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4156241-4156241",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4156241",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Bowen",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "217 P.3d 756",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4156241 us pension / defined benefit issues 217 p.3d 756 in re marriage of bowen qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4156241-4156241"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4156856-4156856",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4156856",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "VINCENT v. SHANOVICH",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 16-0431 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4156856 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 16-0431 fc vincent v. shanovich qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4156856-4156856"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4160901-4160901",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4160901",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4160901",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "518 U.S. 81",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4160901 us pension / defined benefit issues 518 u.s. 81 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4160901-4160901"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4161888-4161888",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4161888",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "K.H. v. A.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "351 N.E.2d 113",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4161888 us pension / defined benefit issues 351 n.e.2d 113 k.h. v. a.s qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4161888-4161888"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4162524-4162524",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4162524",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "TERRI L. RICHMAN v. SCOTT A. WALLMAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "992 A.2d 1137",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4162524 us pension / defined benefit issues 992 a.2d 1137 terri l. richman v. scott a. wallman qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4162524-4162524"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4163249-4163249",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4163249",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4163249",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20160072",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "660 N.W.2d 586",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4163249 us erisa / defined contribution issues 20160072 660 n.w.2d 586 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4163249-4163249"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4164314-4164314",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4164314",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Benson",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16–1441",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4164314 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 16–1441 domestic relations order in re marriage of benson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4164314-4164314"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4164539-4164539",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4164539",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4164539",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4164539 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4164539-4164539"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4170474-4170474",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4170474",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4170474",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4170474 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4170474-4170474"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4170937-4170937",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4170937",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LYNNE E. HARRISON v. EDWIN B. HARRISON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "944 S.W.2d 379",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4170937 us pension / defined benefit issues 944 s.w.2d 379 lynne e. harrison v. edwin b. harrison qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4170937-4170937"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4171169-4171169",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4171169",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of MISTI and TIM JANES. MISTI JANES",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "176 Cal.App.4th 1438",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4171169 us pension / defined benefit issues 176 cal.app.4th 1438 in re the marriage of misti and tim janes. misti janes qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4171169-4171169"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4172199-4172199",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4172199",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4172199",
      "extracted_docket_number": "OT-16-029 Appellant Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "554 N.E.2d 83",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4172199 us pension / defined benefit issues ot-16-029 appellant trial 554 n.e.2d 83 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4172199-4172199"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4172617-4172617",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4172617",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4172617",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4172617 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4172617-4172617"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4174529-4174529",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4174529",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ERIC P. SOUSA v. DONNA M. SOUSA",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "116 A.3d 865",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4174529 us pension / defined benefit issues 116 a.3d 865 eric p. sousa v. donna m. sousa qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4174529-4174529"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4175148-4175148",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4175148",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF NICOLE MARIE FLUENT AND GRANT JEROME FLUENT Upon the Petition of NICOLE MARIE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-1321",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4175148 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 16-1321 domestic relations order in re the marriage of nicole marie fluent and grant jerome fluent upon the petition of nicole marie qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4175148-4175148"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4175670-4175670",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4175670",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4175670",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4175670 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4175670-4175670"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4177101-4177101",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4177101",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Glover graduation",
      "extracted_docket_number": "34145-3-111 In re Marriage of Glover",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4177101 us pension / defined benefit issues 34145-3-111 in re marriage of glover in re marriage of glover graduation qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4177101-4177101"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4178160-4178160",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4178160",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4178160",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15–2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4178160 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 15–2016 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4178160-4178160"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4178280-4178280",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4178280",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4178280",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4178280 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4178280-4178280"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4178486-4178486",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4178486",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4178486",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15–2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4178486 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 15–2016 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4178486-4178486"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4179502-4179502",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4179502",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF CAROL LYNN GUPTON AND WENDEE KAY BROWN Upon the Petition of CAROL LYNN GUPTON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-1784",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4179502 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 16-1784 domestic relations order in re the marriage of carol lynn gupton and wendee kay brown upon the petition of carol lynn gupton qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4179502-4179502"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4180140-4180140",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4180140",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Kane",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Second Division Docket No. 2-15-0774",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "806 F.3d 414",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4180140 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues second division docket no. 2-15-0774 806 f.3d 414 in re marriage of kane qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4180140-4180140"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4182228-4182228",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4182228",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4182228",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-CA-88 12 that the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "421 N.E.2d 1293",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4182228 us pension / defined benefit issues 16-ca-88 12 that the trial 421 n.e.2d 1293 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4182228-4182228"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4183930-4183930",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4183930",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JOHN M. BECK",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-1443",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4183930 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 16-1443 domestic relations order in re the marriage of john m. beck qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4183930-4183930"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4184099-4184099",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4184099",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4184099",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "450 N.E.2d 1140",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4184099 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 450 n.e.2d 1140 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4184099-4184099"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4185350-4185350",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4185350",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4185350",
      "extracted_docket_number": "329993 Lenawee Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4185350 us pension / defined benefit issues 329993 lenawee circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4185350-4185350"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4185351-4185351",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4185351",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Cray",
      "extracted_docket_number": "329993 Lenawee Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4185351 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 329993 lenawee circuit domestic relations order in re marriage of cray qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4185351-4185351"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4187493-4187493",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4187493",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF PATRICIA SUE TRIPP AND CRAIG ALAN TRIPP Upon the Petition of PATRICIA SUE TRIPP",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-1996",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 N.W.2d 252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4187493 us pension / defined benefit issues 16-1996 545 n.w.2d 252 in re the marriage of patricia sue tripp and craig alan tripp upon the petition of patricia sue tripp qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4187493-4187493"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4187806-4187806",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4187806",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Bartley",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17A03-1612-DR-2719 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "678 N.E.2d 423",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4187806 us erisa / defined contribution issues 17a03-1612-dr-2719 v 678 n.e.2d 423 in re marriage of bartley qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4187806-4187806"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4189186-4189186",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4189186",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DOWNHAM v. DOWNHAM",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 16-0164 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "680 P.2d 1217",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4189186 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 16-0164 fc 680 p.2d 1217 downham v. downham qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4189186-4189186"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4190614-4190614",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4190614",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4190614",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "322 P.3d 897",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4190614 us pension / defined benefit issues 322 p.3d 897 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4190614-4190614"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4191180-4191180",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4191180",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "K.A.R. v. T.G.L",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1443 WDA 2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "107 A.3d 770",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4191180 us pension / defined benefit issues 1443 wda 2016 107 a.3d 770 k.a.r. v. t.g.l qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4191180-4191180"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4192398-4192398",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4192398",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4192398",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "578 N.E.2d 371",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4192398 us pension / defined benefit issues 578 n.e.2d 371 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4192398-4192398"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4193432-4193432",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4193432",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4193432",
      "extracted_docket_number": "428 EDA 2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "598 A.2d 31",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4193432 us pension / defined benefit issues 428 eda 2016 598 a.2d 31 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4193432-4193432"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4194978-4194978",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4194978",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "TIMOTHY ALAN PORTICE v. ROSHAWNDA LYNN FOSTER PORTICE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "to open accounts after the divorce. Tennessee",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "429 S.W.3d 562",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4194978 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues to open accounts after the divorce. tennessee 429 s.w.3d 562 timothy alan portice v. roshawnda lynn foster portice qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4194978-4194978"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4196283-4196283",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4196283",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MICHELLE ANNE KRAKER AND LEONARD PAUL KRAKER Upon the Petition of MICHELLE ANNE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-1739",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "737 N.W.2d 97",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4196283 us pension / defined benefit issues 16-1739 737 n.w.2d 97 in re the marriage of michelle anne kraker and leonard paul kraker upon the petition of michelle anne qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4196283-4196283"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4197551-4197551",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4197551",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4197551",
      "extracted_docket_number": "333880 Kalamazoo Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4197551 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 333880 kalamazoo circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4197551-4197551"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4197869-4197869",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4197869",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4197869",
      "extracted_docket_number": "for entry of an order dividing husband",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "738 F.2d 968",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4197869 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues for entry of an order dividing husband 738 f.2d 968 qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4197869-4197869"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4198662-4198662",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4198662",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4198662",
      "extracted_docket_number": "34A05-1607-DR-1692 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "6 N.E.3d 471",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4198662 us pension / defined benefit issues 34a05-1607-dr-1692 v 6 n.e.3d 471 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4198662-4198662"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4199614-4199614",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4199614",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4199614",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-16-750",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "749 N.W.2d 470",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4199614 us pension / defined benefit issues a-16-750 749 n.w.2d 470 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4199614-4199614"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4200274-4200274",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4200274",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "WALTER R. HURT v. VERDENA JONES-HURT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24D02003910 REPORTED",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "137 S. Ct. 1400",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4200274 us pension / defined benefit issues 24d02003910 reported 137 s. ct. 1400 walter r. hurt v. verdena jones-hurt qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4200274-4200274"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4200798-4200798",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4200798",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "G.S. v. M.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": "02A03-1612-DR-2724 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "895 N.E.2d 1215",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4200798 us pension / defined benefit issues 02a03-1612-dr-2724 v 895 n.e.2d 1215 g.s. v. m.s qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4200798-4200798"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4200883-4200883",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4200883",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4200883",
      "extracted_docket_number": "835 WDA 2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "669 A.2d 969",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4200883 us pension / defined benefit issues 835 wda 2016 669 a.2d 969 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4200883-4200883"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4201793-4201793",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4201793",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4201793",
      "extracted_docket_number": "190 MDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "663 A.2d 184",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4201793 us pension / defined benefit issues 190 mda 2017 663 a.2d 184 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4201793-4201793"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4201842-4201842",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4201842",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4201842",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "637 N.E.2d 914",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4201842 us pension / defined benefit issues 637 n.e.2d 914 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4201842-4201842"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4203104-4203104",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4203104",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF CAROL A. TINKER AND GEOFFRY A. TINKER Upon the Petition of CAROL A. TINKER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-0327",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "810 N.W.2d 880",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4203104 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 17-0327 810 n.w.2d 880 in re the marriage of carol a. tinker and geoffry a. tinker upon the petition of carol a. tinker qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4203104-4203104"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4203235-4203235",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4203235",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4203235",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "249 S.W.3d 346",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4203235 us pension / defined benefit issues 249 s.w.3d 346 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4203235-4203235"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4205501-4205501",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4205501",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4205501",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1618 WDA 2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "874 A.2d 148",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4205501 us pension / defined benefit issues 1618 wda 2016 874 a.2d 148 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4205501-4205501"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4206481-4206481",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4206481",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT v. ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS STATE TEACHERS RETIREMENT COUNTY OF SUMMIT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 THE",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4206481 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1 the domestic relations order appeal from judgment v. entered in the court of common pleas state teachers retirement county of summit qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4206481-4206481"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4206676-4206676",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4206676",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF RICHARD L. COOK AND SUSAN K. COOK Upon the Petition of RICHARD L. COOK",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-2078",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 N.W.2d 252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4206676 us pension / defined benefit issues 16-2078 545 n.w.2d 252 in re the marriage of richard l. cook and susan k. cook upon the petition of richard l. cook qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4206676-4206676"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4207112-4207112",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4207112",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Davis",
      "extracted_docket_number": "06A01-1701-DR-52 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "987 N.E.2d 1130",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4207112 us pension / defined benefit issues 06a01-1701-dr-52 v 987 n.e.2d 1130 in re marriage of davis qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4207112-4207112"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4211612-4211612",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4211612",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4211612",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4211612 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4211612-4211612"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4212355-4212355",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4212355",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4212355",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20170085",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "700 N.W.2d 684",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4212355 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20170085 700 n.w.2d 684 qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4212355-4212355"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4213885-4213885",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4213885",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4213885",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "823 F.3d 537",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4213885 us erisa / defined contribution issues 823 f.3d 537 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4213885-4213885"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4214151-4214151",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4214151",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4214151",
      "extracted_docket_number": "reflects no further action in the case until the en",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4214151 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues reflects no further action in the case until the en domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4214151-4214151"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4214976-4214976",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4214976",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4214976",
      "extracted_docket_number": "equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4214976 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues equalization efforts. see tex. gov domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4214976-4214976"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4216296-4216296",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4216296",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CLEARY v. CORDERO",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4216296 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues cleary v. cordero qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4216296-4216296"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4216432-4216432",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4216432",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4216432",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "830 F.3d 1195",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4216432 us erisa / defined contribution issues 830 f.3d 1195 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4216432-4216432"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4218021-4218021",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4218021",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4218021",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4218021 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4218021-4218021"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4218687-4218687",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4218687",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MARSHA KAY HILLER AND STEVEN MARK NELSEN Upon the Petition of MARSHA KAY HILLER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-0997",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "681 N.W.2d 612",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4218687 us pension / defined benefit issues 16-0997 681 n.w.2d 612 in re the marriage of marsha kay hiller and steven mark nelsen upon the petition of marsha kay hiller qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4218687-4218687"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4226232-4226232",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4226232",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "VINCENT v. SHANOVICH",
      "extracted_docket_number": "CV-17-0175-PR",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4226232 us pension / defined benefit issues cv-17-0175-pr vincent v. shanovich qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4226232-4226232"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4228400-4228400",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4228400",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4228400",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "86 F.3d 982",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4228400 us pension / defined benefit issues 86 f.3d 982 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4228400-4228400"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4229168-4229168",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4229168",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In Re Marriage of McDonald",
      "extracted_docket_number": "09-17-00254-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "118 S.W.3d 829",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4229168 us pension / defined benefit issues 09-17-00254-cv 118 s.w.3d 829 in re marriage of mcdonald qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4229168-4229168"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4233684-4233684",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4233684",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4233684",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "469 S.W.3d 314",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4233684 us erisa / defined contribution issues 469 s.w.3d 314 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4233684-4233684"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4235466-4235466",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4235466",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4235466",
      "extracted_docket_number": "03-17-00693-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4235466 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 03-17-00693-cv domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4235466-4235466"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4235538-4235538",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4235538",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Steel",
      "extracted_docket_number": "333569 Kent Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4235538 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 333569 kent circuit in re marriage of steel qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4235538-4235538"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4235841-4235841",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4235841",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Steel",
      "extracted_docket_number": "333569 Kent Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4235841 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 333569 kent circuit in re marriage of steel qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4235841-4235841"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4236199-4236199",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4236199",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Frank",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4236199 us pension / defined benefit issues in re marriage of frank qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4236199-4236199"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4237795-4237795",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4237795",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4237795",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4 IN THE SUPREME",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4237795 us pension / defined benefit issues 4 in the supreme qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4237795-4237795"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4238845-4238845",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4238845",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4238845",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "22 N.E.3d 1035",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4238845 us pension / defined benefit issues 22 n.e.3d 1035 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4238845-4238845"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4240619-4240619",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4240619",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4240619",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entry that reads:",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4240619 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues entry that reads: domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4240619-4240619"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4241464-4241464",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4241464",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4241464",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4241464 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4241464-4241464"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4243408-4243408",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4243408",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4243408",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4 IN THE SUPREME",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4243408 us pension / defined benefit issues 4 in the supreme qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4243408-4243408"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4243811-4243811",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4243811",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4243811",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4243811 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4243811-4243811"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4243937-4243937",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4243937",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Boyle",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1956 MDA 2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "88 A.3d 222",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4243937 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1956 mda 2016 88 a.3d 222 in re estate of boyle qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4243937-4243937"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4244470-4244470",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4244470",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4244470",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4 IN THE SUPREME",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4244470 us pension / defined benefit issues 4 in the supreme qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4244470-4244470"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4245580-4245580",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4245580",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. VERNON CHARLES DONNELLY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "AG No. 3",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4245580 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues ag no. 3 domestic relations order attorney grievance commission of maryland v. vernon charles donnelly qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4245580-4245580"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4249174-4249174",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4249174",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4249174",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15–2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4249174 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 15–2016 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4249174-4249174"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4249198-4249198",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4249198",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Benson",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16–1441",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4249198 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 16–1441 domestic relations order in re marriage of benson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4249198-4249198"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4249357-4249357",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4249357",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4249357",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14–1201",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "855 N.W.2d 156",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4249357 us pension / defined benefit issues 14–1201 855 n.w.2d 156 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4249357-4249357"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4249618-4249618",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4249618",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF KATHRYN JUNE MORRIS AND DENNIS EUGENE MORRIS Upon the Petition of KATHRYN JUNE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "11–0118",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "647 A.2d 812",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4249618 us pension / defined benefit issues 11–0118 647 a.2d 812 in re the marriage of kathryn june morris and dennis eugene morris upon the petition of kathryn june qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4249618-4249618"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4249705-4249705",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4249705",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF TAMARA D. VEIT AND GREGORY H. VEIT Upon the Petition of TAMARA D. VEIT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "09–1312",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4249705 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 09–1312 domestic relations order in re the marriage of tamara d. veit and gregory h. veit upon the petition of tamara d. veit qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4249705-4249705"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4249734-4249734",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4249734",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE MARRIAGE OF TRACY ALAN HOWELL AND LISA ANN HOWELL",
      "extracted_docket_number": "09–0084",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "788 N.W.2d 833",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4249734 us pension / defined benefit issues 09–0084 788 n.w.2d 833 in re marriage of tracy alan howell and lisa ann howell qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4249734-4249734"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4249851-4249851",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4249851",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF DAVID A. BROWN and PAMELA S. BROWN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "08–0948",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 N.W.2d 252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4249851 us pension / defined benefit issues 08–0948 545 n.w.2d 252 in re the marriage of david a. brown and pamela s. brown qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4249851-4249851"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4250184-4250184",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4250184",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Sullins",
      "extracted_docket_number": "143 / 05-1040",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "692 N.W.2d 360",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4250184 us pension / defined benefit issues 143 / 05-1040 692 n.w.2d 360 in re marriage of sullins qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4250184-4250184"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4250288-4250288",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4250288",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF BONNIE M. PALS AND JAMES J. PALS Upon the Petition of BONNIE M. PALS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "48 / 05-0507",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4250288 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 48 / 05-0507 domestic relations order in re the marriage of bonnie m. pals and james j. pals upon the petition of bonnie m. pals qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4250288-4250288"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4250295-4250295",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4250295",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF DONNA LEE SULLINS AND RAYMOND W. SULLINS Upon the Petition of DONNA LEE SULLINS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "42 / 04-0950",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "695 N.W.2d 493",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4250295 us pension / defined benefit issues 42 / 04-0950 695 n.w.2d 493 in re the marriage of donna lee sullins and raymond w. sullins upon the petition of donna lee sullins qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4250295-4250295"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4250633-4250633",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4250633",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF LISA A. KOSTER AND RYAN W. KOSTER Upon the Petition of LISA A. KOSTER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-1583",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "611 N.W.2d 489",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4250633 us erisa / defined contribution issues 16-1583 611 n.w.2d 489 in re the marriage of lisa a. koster and ryan w. koster upon the petition of lisa a. koster qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4250633-4250633"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4251651-4251651",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4251651",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JOSEPH DINUNZIO v. CATHERINE DINUNZIO",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "175 A.3d 601",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4251651 us pension / defined benefit issues 175 a.3d 601 joseph dinunzio v. catherine dinunzio qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4251651-4251651"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4252900-4252900",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4252900",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4252900",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3260 EDA 2016 : Appellant :",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "633 A.2d 589",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4252900 us pension / defined benefit issues 3260 eda 2016 : appellant : 633 a.2d 589 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4252900-4252900"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4257541-4257541",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4257541",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4257541",
      "extracted_docket_number": "324853 Dickinson Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4257541 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 324853 dickinson circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4257541-4257541"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4258076-4258076",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4258076",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4258076",
      "extracted_docket_number": "324853 Dickinson Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4258076 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 324853 dickinson circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4258076-4258076"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4259285-4259285",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4259285",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4259285",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1:13-cv-03898-TWT METLIFE LIFE AND ANNUITY COMPANY",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "245 F.3d 1321",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4259285 us pension / defined benefit issues 1:13-cv-03898-twt metlife life and annuity company 245 f.3d 1321 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4259285-4259285"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4259770-4259770",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4259770",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4259770",
      "extracted_docket_number": "336303 Wayne Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4259770 us pension / defined benefit issues 336303 wayne circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4259770-4259770"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4260091-4260091",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4260091",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4260091",
      "extracted_docket_number": "336303 Wayne Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4260091 us pension / defined benefit issues 336303 wayne circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4260091-4260091"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4262299-4262299",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4262299",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4262299",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4262299 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4262299-4262299"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4262355-4262355",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4262355",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4262355",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1643 MDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "938 A.2d 246",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4262355 us pension / defined benefit issues 1643 mda 2017 938 a.2d 246 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4262355-4262355"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4262671-4262671",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4262671",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4262671",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1055 EDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "167 A.3d 127",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4262671 us pension / defined benefit issues 1055 eda 2017 167 a.3d 127 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4262671-4262671"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4265072-4265072",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4265072",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF SHANTEL N. DOW AND DANIEL D. DOW Upon the Petition of SHANTEL N. DOW",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-0534",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "874 N.W.2d 103",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4265072 us pension / defined benefit issues 17-0534 874 n.w.2d 103 in re the marriage of shantel n. dow and daniel d. dow upon the petition of shantel n. dow qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4265072-4265072"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4265566-4265566",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4265566",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LOVEJOY v. LOVEJOY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 17-0411 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4265566 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 17-0411 fc lovejoy v. lovejoy qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4265566-4265566"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4270618-4270618",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4270618",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Tebbens",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-17-0777 Opinion",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4270618 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1-17-0777 opinion domestic relations order in re marriage of tebbens qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4270618-4270618"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4271121-4271121",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4271121",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Farrell",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-17-0611",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4271121 us pension / defined benefit issues 1-17-0611 in re marriage of farrell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4271121-4271121"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4273233-4273233",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4273233",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LACY v. LACY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 17-0437 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4273233 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 17-0437 fc lacy v. lacy qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4273233-4273233"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4273505-4273505",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4273505",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4273505",
      "extracted_docket_number": "340123 Otsego Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4273505 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 340123 otsego circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4273505-4273505"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4273897-4273897",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4273897",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4273897",
      "extracted_docket_number": "340123 Otsego Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4273897 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 340123 otsego circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4273897-4273897"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4274635-4274635",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4274635",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Herald & Steadman",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "965 P.2d 1",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4274635 us pension / defined benefit issues 965 p.2d 1 in re marriage of herald & steadman qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4274635-4274635"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4274845-4274845",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4274845",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "TRACY M. THOMASI v. EDWARD J. THOMASI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "CV-16-6059830-S. Appellate",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4274845 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues cv-16-6059830-s. appellate domestic relations order tracy m. thomasi v. edward j. thomasi qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4274845-4274845"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4274887-4274887",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4274887",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Armstrong",
      "extracted_docket_number": "W2017-00152-COA-R3-CV A wife",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "538 S.W.3d 476",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4274887 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues w2017-00152-coa-r3-cv a wife 538 s.w.3d 476 in re estate of armstrong qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4274887-4274887"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4275575-4275575",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4275575",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4275575",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4275575 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4275575-4275575"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4276658-4276658",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4276658",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4276658",
      "extracted_docket_number": "206 WDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4276658 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 206 wda 2017 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4276658-4276658"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4276659-4276659",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4276659",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4276659",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "146 A.3d 795",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4276659 us pension / defined benefit issues 146 a.3d 795 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4276659-4276659"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4277379-4277379",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4277379",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4277379",
      "extracted_docket_number": "597 MDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "119 A.3d 382",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4277379 us pension / defined benefit issues 597 mda 2017 119 a.3d 382 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4277379-4277379"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4278718-4278718",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4278718",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Seders",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2017-CA-31 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "740 N.E.2d 265",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4278718 us pension / defined benefit issues 2017-ca-31 : v. : trial 740 n.e.2d 265 in re marriage of seders qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4278718-4278718"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4278753-4278753",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4278753",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4278753",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years used",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "154 S.W.3d 93",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4278753 us pension / defined benefit issues of years used 154 s.w.3d 93 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4278753-4278753"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4279163-4279163",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4279163",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COA MELISSA CHRISTINE BLACK WEAVER APPELLANT v. RICHARD FRANKLIN WEAVER APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4279163 us pension / defined benefit issues coa melissa christine black weaver appellant v. richard franklin weaver appellee date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4279163-4279163"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4283326-4283326",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4283326",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4283326",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "996 A.2d 696",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4283326 us pension / defined benefit issues 996 a.2d 696 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4283326-4283326"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4285541-4285541",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4285541",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Bowe & Perry",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4285541 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order in re marriage of bowe & perry qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4285541-4285541"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4285710-4285710",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4285710",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4285710",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-17-422",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "864 N.W.2d 689",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4285710 us pension / defined benefit issues a-17-422 864 n.w.2d 689 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4285710-4285710"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4285754-4285754",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4285754",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MORROW v. MORROW",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 17-0658 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4285754 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 17-0658 fc morrow v. morrow qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4285754-4285754"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4286025-4286025",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4286025",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4286025",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "99 S.W.3d 150",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4286025 us erisa / defined contribution issues 99 s.w.3d 150 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4286025-4286025"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4286372-4286372",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4286372",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4286372",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15-cv-02635. Her later filings and the District",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "29 F. App'x 907",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4286372 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 15-cv-02635. her later filings and the district 29 f. app'x 907 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4286372-4286372"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4290437-4290437",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4290437",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Dalton",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "412 S.W.2d 29",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4290437 us pension / defined benefit issues 412 s.w.2d 29 in re marriage of dalton qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4290437-4290437"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4290438-4290438",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4290438",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Thomas",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "641 S.W.2d 210",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4290438 us pension / defined benefit issues 641 s.w.2d 210 in re marriage of thomas qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4290438-4290438"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4291602-4291602",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4291602",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JULIE ANN ANKENBAUER AND MARTYN DAVID ANKENBAUER Upon the Petition of JULIE ANN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-1227",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "715 N.W.2d 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4291602 us pension / defined benefit issues 17-1227 715 n.w.2d 242 in re the marriage of julie ann ankenbauer and martyn david ankenbauer upon the petition of julie ann qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4291602-4291602"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4292044-4292044",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4292044",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4292044",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "9 N.E.3d 1016",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4292044 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 9 n.e.3d 1016 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4292044-4292044"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4293146-4293146",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4293146",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4293146",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4293146 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4293146-4293146"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4293283-4293283",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4293283",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4293283",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1817 MDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "629 A.2d 1014",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4293283 us pension / defined benefit issues 1817 mda 2017 629 a.2d 1014 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4293283-4293283"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4293872-4293872",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4293872",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4293872",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "568 A.2d 419",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4293872 us pension / defined benefit issues 568 a.2d 419 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4293872-4293872"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4294014-4294014",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4294014",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4294014",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3888 EDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "562 A.2d 912",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4294014 us pension / defined benefit issues 3888 eda 2017 562 a.2d 912 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4294014-4294014"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4294342-4294342",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4294342",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "KATIE N. CONROY v. AMMAR A. IDLIBI",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "787 A.2d 46",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4294342 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 787 a.2d 46 katie n. conroy v. ammar a. idlibi qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4294342-4294342"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4294809-4294809",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4294809",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "KRENZEN v. KATZ",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 17-0367 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4294809 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1 ca-cv 17-0367 fc krenzen v. katz qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4294809-4294809"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4295195-4295195",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4295195",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4295195",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4295195 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4295195-4295195"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4295289-4295289",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4295289",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF BENJAMIN WILLIAM INGERSOLL AND JENNIFER LIZABETH INGERSOLL Upon the Petition of",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-1974",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "827 N.W.2d 671",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4295289 us pension / defined benefit issues 17-1974 827 n.w.2d 671 in re the marriage of benjamin william ingersoll and jennifer lizabeth ingersoll upon the petition of qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4295289-4295289"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4298735-4298735",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4298735",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Ford",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "435 S.W.3d 347",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4298735 us pension / defined benefit issues 435 s.w.3d 347 in re marriage of ford qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4298735-4298735"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4300442-4300442",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4300442",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4300442",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1787 WDA 2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "557 A.2d 23",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4300442 us pension / defined benefit issues 1787 wda 2016 557 a.2d 23 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4300442-4300442"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4301716-4301716",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4301716",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4301716",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4301716 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4301716-4301716"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4301899-4301899",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4301899",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4301899",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4301899 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4301899-4301899"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4302778-4302778",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4302778",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Fisher",
      "extracted_docket_number": "30A01-1712-DR-2768 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "62 N.E.3d 1212",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4302778 us pension / defined benefit issues 30a01-1712-dr-2768 v 62 n.e.3d 1212 in re marriage of fisher qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4302778-4302778"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4304042-4304042",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4304042",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4304042",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20170472",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "417 P.3d 78",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4304042 us erisa / defined contribution issues 20170472 417 p.3d 78 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4304042-4304042"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4304357-4304357",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4304357",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4304357",
      "extracted_docket_number": "440 C.D. 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "754 A.2d 36",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4304357 us pension / defined benefit issues 440 c.d. 2017 754 a.2d 36 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4304357-4304357"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4305023-4305023",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4305023",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4305023",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "741 P.2d 649",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4305023 us pension / defined benefit issues 741 p.2d 649 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4305023-4305023"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4305665-4305665",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4305665",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4305665",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4305665 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4305665-4305665"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4309283-4309283",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4309283",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LLC v. CNG",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1645 WDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "808 A.2d 232",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4309283 us pension / defined benefit issues 1645 wda 2017 808 a.2d 232 llc v. cng qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4309283-4309283"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4309548-4309548",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4309548",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4309548",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA18-110",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4309548 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues coa18-110 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4309548-4309548"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4309600-4309600",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4309600",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4309600",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "669 N.E.2d 878",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4309600 us pension / defined benefit issues 669 n.e.2d 878 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4309600-4309600"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4309776-4309776",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4309776",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4309776",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4309776 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4309776-4309776"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4310463-4310463",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4310463",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "RICHARD BUTLER v. EDITH BUTLER",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4310463 us pension / defined benefit issues richard butler v. edith butler qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4310463-4310463"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4311782-4311782",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4311782",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF CHRISTI ANNE FICEK AND LAWRENCE PETER FICEK",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-2028",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "827 N.W.2d 671",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4311782 us pension / defined benefit issues 17-2028 827 n.w.2d 671 in re the marriage of christi anne ficek and lawrence peter ficek qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4311782-4311782"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4311783-4311783",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4311783",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JOSHUA ROBERT DEMMER AND JACQUELYN A. DEMMER Upon the Petition of JOSHUA ROBERT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-0831",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "376 N.W.2d 918",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4311783 us erisa / defined contribution issues 17-0831 376 n.w.2d 918 in re the marriage of joshua robert demmer and jacquelyn a. demmer upon the petition of joshua robert qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4311783-4311783"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4311784-4311784",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4311784",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MARK ALAN BERG AND AMY LYNN BERG Upon the Petition of MARK ALAN BERG",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-1880",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "699 N.W.2d 260",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4311784 us pension / defined benefit issues 16-1880 699 n.w.2d 260 in re the marriage of mark alan berg and amy lynn berg upon the petition of mark alan berg qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4311784-4311784"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4311891-4311891",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4311891",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4311891",
      "extracted_docket_number": "124 MDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "118 A.3d 455",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4311891 us pension / defined benefit issues 124 mda 2017 118 a.3d 455 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4311891-4311891"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4312211-4312211",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4312211",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "DOWNUM v. DOWNUM",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 17-0693 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4312211 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 17-0693 fc domestic relations order downum v. downum qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4312211-4312211"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4313328-4313328",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4313328",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COA EDWARD WILLIAM SPEIGHTS III APPELLANT v. KIMBERLY DANIELS SPEIGHTS APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "that any financial forms were exchanged",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4313328 us pension / defined benefit issues that any financial forms were exchanged coa edward william speights iii appellant v. kimberly daniels speights appellee date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4313328-4313328"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4314685-4314685",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4314685",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4314685",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "520 U.S. 833",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4314685 us pension / defined benefit issues 520 u.s. 833 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4314685-4314685"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4315052-4315052",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4315052",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "VINCENT v. SHANOVICH",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 16-0431 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4315052 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 16-0431 fc vincent v. shanovich qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4315052-4315052"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4315583-4315583",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4315583",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JEFFREY J. MONAHAN AND RONAE L. MONAHAN Upon the Petition of JEFFREY J. MONAHAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-0904",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "827 N.W.2d 671",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4315583 us pension / defined benefit issues 17-0904 827 n.w.2d 671 in re the marriage of jeffrey j. monahan and ronae l. monahan upon the petition of jeffrey j. monahan qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4315583-4315583"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4315797-4315797",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4315797",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Tebbens",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-17-0777 Rule 23 order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4315797 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1-17-0777 rule 23 order domestic relations order in re marriage of tebbens qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4315797-4315797"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4316093-4316093",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4316093",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of September",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "696 N.E.2d 888",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4316093 us pension / defined benefit issues 696 n.e.2d 888 in re the marriage of september qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4316093-4316093"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4319670-4319670",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4319670",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JACKIE LEA SPITZMILLER AND SCOTT LOUIS SPITZMILLER Upon the Petition of JACKIE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-0803",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "874 N.W.2d 103",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4319670 us pension / defined benefit issues 17-0803 874 n.w.2d 103 in re the marriage of jackie lea spitzmiller and scott louis spitzmiller upon the petition of jackie qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4319670-4319670"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4319883-4319883",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4319883",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4319883",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2018CA0002 5 appellant contends the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "588 N.E.2d 285",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4319883 us pension / defined benefit issues 2018ca0002 5 appellant contends the trial 588 n.e.2d 285 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4319883-4319883"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4321269-4321269",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4321269",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4321269",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "134 S. Ct. 2242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4321269 us erisa / defined contribution issues 134 s. ct. 2242 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4321269-4321269"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4323791-4323791",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4323791",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4323791",
      "extracted_docket_number": "342922 Marquette Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4323791 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 342922 marquette circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4323791-4323791"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4324382-4324382",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4324382",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "UTHE v. UTHE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 18-0021 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4324382 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1 ca-cv 18-0021 fc uthe v. uthe qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4324382-4324382"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4328374-4328374",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4328374",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "PAMELA ANNETTE DOTSON v. WILLIE JEFFERSON DOTSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "293 S.W.3d 537",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4328374 us pension / defined benefit issues 293 s.w.3d 537 pamela annette dotson v. willie jefferson dotson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4328374-4328374"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4328576-4328576",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4328576",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF DARREN M. BECHTHOLD AND ANGELA J. BECHTHOLD Upon the Petition of DARREN M",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-1191",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "737 N.W.2d 97",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4328576 us pension / defined benefit issues 17-1191 737 n.w.2d 97 in re the marriage of darren m. bechthold and angela j. bechthold upon the petition of darren m qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4328576-4328576"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4329317-4329317",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4329317",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4329317",
      "extracted_docket_number": "339028 Lenawee Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4329317 us pension / defined benefit issues 339028 lenawee circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4329317-4329317"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4330628-4330628",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4330628",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4330628",
      "extracted_docket_number": "8945-95",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4330628 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 8945-95 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4330628-4330628"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4330687-4330687",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4330687",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4330687",
      "extracted_docket_number": "899-95",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "290 U.S. 111",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4330687 us pension / defined benefit issues 899-95 290 u.s. 111 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4330687-4330687"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4330783-4330783",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4330783",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4330783",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15334-95",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4330783 us pension / defined benefit issues 15334-95 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4330783-4330783"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4330939-4330939",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4330939",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4330939",
      "extracted_docket_number": "6115-95",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4330939 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 6115-95 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4330939-4330939"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4332713-4332713",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4332713",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4332713",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17 UNITED STATES TAX",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "857 P.2d 631",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4332713 us pension / defined benefit issues 17 united states tax 857 p.2d 631 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4332713-4332713"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4333097-4333097",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4333097",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4333097",
      "extracted_docket_number": "8423-98",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4333097 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 8423-98 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4333097-4333097"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4334344-4334344",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4334344",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4334344",
      "extracted_docket_number": "7036-02S",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4334344 us erisa / defined contribution issues 7036-02s qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4334344-4334344"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4334792-4334792",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4334792",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4334792",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10499-02",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "140 F.3d 240",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4334792 us pension / defined benefit issues 10499-02 140 f.3d 240 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4334792-4334792"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4335340-4335340",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4335340",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4335340",
      "extracted_docket_number": "8964-03",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4335340 us erisa / defined contribution issues 8964-03 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4335340-4335340"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4335342-4335342",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4335342",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Gillmore",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10 UNITED STATES TAX",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "629 P.2d 1",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4335342 us pension / defined benefit issues 10 united states tax 629 p.2d 1 in re marriage of gillmore qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4335342-4335342"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4337353-4337353",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4337353",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4337353",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15 UNITED STATES TAX",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "453 U.S. 210",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4337353 us pension / defined benefit issues 15 united states tax 453 u.s. 210 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4337353-4337353"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4342312-4342312",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4342312",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Adams",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18A-DR-249 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "962 N.E.2d 1224",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4342312 us pension / defined benefit issues 18a-dr-249 v 962 n.e.2d 1224 in re marriage of adams qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4342312-4342312"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4343066-4343066",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4343066",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Trogdon",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA18-95",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4343066 us erisa / defined contribution issues coa18-95 in re estate of trogdon qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4343066-4343066"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-43436-43436",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 43436",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 43436",
      "extracted_docket_number": "04-31184 -2- district",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "131 F.3d 1120",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 43436 us pension / defined benefit issues 04-31184 -2- district 131 f.3d 1120 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-43436-43436"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4343604-4343604",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4343604",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4343604",
      "extracted_docket_number": "27928 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "450 N.E.2d 1140",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4343604 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 27928 : v. : trial 450 n.e.2d 1140 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4343604-4343604"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4344096-4344096",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4344096",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4344096",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-17-00014-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "411 S.W.3d 445",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4344096 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13-17-00014-cv 411 s.w.3d 445 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4344096-4344096"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4346131-4346131",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4346131",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4346131",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "368 P.2d 546",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4346131 us pension / defined benefit issues 368 p.2d 546 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4346131-4346131"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4347428-4347428",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4347428",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF DEBORAH WHITFORD AND RICHARD WHITFORD Upon the Petition of DEBORAH WHITFORD",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-2081",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "807 N.W.2d 828",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4347428 us pension / defined benefit issues 17-2081 807 n.w.2d 828 in re the marriage of deborah whitford and richard whitford upon the petition of deborah whitford qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4347428-4347428"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4347430-4347430",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4347430",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF CHRISTINE Y. FREUDENBERG AND MARK WILLIAM FREUDENBERG Upon the Petition of",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17-1569",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 N.W.2d 252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4347430 us pension / defined benefit issues 17-1569 545 n.w.2d 252 in re the marriage of christine y. freudenberg and mark william freudenberg upon the petition of qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4347430-4347430"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4348136-4348136",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4348136",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4348136",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20180097",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "520 N.W.2d 855",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4348136 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20180097 520 n.w.2d 855 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4348136-4348136"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4351114-4351114",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4351114",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "GAIL REINKE v. WALTER SING",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "179 A.3d 769",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4351114 us erisa / defined contribution issues 179 a.3d 769 gail reinke v. walter sing qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4351114-4351114"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4354988-4354988",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4354988",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Gerleman",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4354988 us pension / defined benefit issues in re marriage of gerleman qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4354988-4354988"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4355161-4355161",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4355161",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Farrell and Howe",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "555 U.S. 285",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4355161 us pension / defined benefit issues 555 u.s. 285 in re marriage of farrell and howe qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4355161-4355161"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4359194-4359194",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4359194",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4359194",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "546 U.S. 459",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4359194 us pension / defined benefit issues 546 u.s. 459 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4359194-4359194"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4360568-4360568",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4360568",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4360568",
      "extracted_docket_number": "because a QDRO for Taylor",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4360568 us pension / defined benefit issues because a qdro for taylor qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4360568-4360568"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4364134-4364134",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4364134",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4364134",
      "extracted_docket_number": "28040 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "85 N.E.3d 1260",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4364134 us erisa / defined contribution issues 28040 : v. : trial 85 n.e.3d 1260 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4364134-4364134"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4364621-4364621",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4364621",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4364621",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA18-600",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4364621 us erisa / defined contribution issues coa18-600 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4364621-4364621"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4365295-4365295",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4365295",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF AMBER BURINGTON AND CHRISTOPHER BURINGTON Upon the Petition of AMBER BURINGTON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18-0901",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4365295 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 18-0901 domestic relations order in re the marriage of amber burington and christopher burington upon the petition of amber burington qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4365295-4365295"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4368882-4368882",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4368882",
      "citation": "QUALIFIED DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4368882",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-18-360",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "918 N.W.2d 1",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4368882 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues a-18-360 918 n.w.2d 1 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4368882-4368882"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4368907-4368907",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4368907",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "QUIJADA v. QUIJADA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 18-0118",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4368907 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 18-0118 domestic relations order quijada v. quijada qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4368907-4368907"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4369010-4369010",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4369010",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4369010",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1512 EDA 2018 : Appellant :",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "4 A.3d 654",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4369010 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1512 eda 2018 : appellant : 4 a.3d 654 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4369010-4369010"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4369252-4369252",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4369252",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4369252",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18A-DR-1375 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "732 N.E.2d 1278",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4369252 us pension / defined benefit issues 18a-dr-1375 v 732 n.e.2d 1278 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4369252-4369252"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4369364-4369364",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4369364",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4369364",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "459 N.E.2d 896",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4369364 us pension / defined benefit issues 459 n.e.2d 896 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4369364-4369364"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4369502-4369502",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4369502",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Ramsey",
      "extracted_docket_number": "equal to the number of months Frank served",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4369502 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues equal to the number of months frank served domestic relations order in re marriage of ramsey qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4369502-4369502"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4371589-4371589",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4371589",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4371589",
      "extracted_docket_number": "340589 Midland Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4371589 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 340589 midland circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4371589-4371589"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4374013-4374013",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4374013",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE ESTATE OF MILFORD CLEO TODD Appeal from the Chancery Court for Benton County No",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "445 S.W.3d 685",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4374013 us pension / defined benefit issues 445 s.w.3d 685 in re estate of milford cleo todd appeal from the chancery court for benton county no qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4374013-4374013"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4377317-4377317",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4377317",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4377317",
      "extracted_docket_number": "343123 Ingham Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4377317 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 343123 ingham circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4377317-4377317"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4378280-4378280",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4378280",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4378280",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA18-600",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4378280 us erisa / defined contribution issues coa18-600 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4378280-4378280"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4378492-4378492",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4378492",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COA GARY L. HALL APPELLANT v. CAROLYN J. HALL APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4378492 us pension / defined benefit issues coa gary l. hall appellant v. carolyn j. hall appellee date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4378492-4378492"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4380650-4380650",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4380650",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CHRISTY KELLER ELROD CHURCH v. DARRELL GENE ELROD",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "90 S.W.3d 566",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4380650 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 90 s.w.3d 566 christy keller elrod church v. darrell gene elrod qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4380650-4380650"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4380715-4380715",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4380715",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "RSWL-DFM v. BHASKAR VYAS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "530 U.S. 211",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4380715 us erisa / defined contribution issues 530 u.s. 211 rswl-dfm v. bhaskar vyas qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4380715-4380715"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4382481-4382481",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4382481",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4382481",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "306 P.3d 1282",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4382481 us pension / defined benefit issues 306 p.3d 1282 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4382481-4382481"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4382607-4382607",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4382607",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4382607",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of assignments of error including the family",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4382607 us pension / defined benefit issues of assignments of error including the family qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4382607-4382607"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4382671-4382671",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4382671",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4382671",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-17-00217-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "527 S.W.3d 299",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4382671 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13-17-00217-cv 527 s.w.3d 299 qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4382671-4382671"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4386876-4386876",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4386876",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4386876",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Entry",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "397 S.W.3d 162",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4386876 us erisa / defined contribution issues entry 397 s.w.3d 162 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4386876-4386876"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4386956-4386956",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4386956",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4386956",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4386956 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4386956-4386956"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4386957-4386957",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4386957",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4386957",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "347 S.W.3d 345",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4386957 us erisa / defined contribution issues 347 s.w.3d 345 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4386957-4386957"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4387812-4387812",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4387812",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4387812",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18-30942",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "520 U.S. 833",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4387812 us pension / defined benefit issues 18-30942 520 u.s. 833 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4387812-4387812"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4389543-4389543",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4389543",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Greenlee",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "516 U.S. 16",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4389543 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 516 u.s. 16 in re marriage of greenlee qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4389543-4389543"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4391256-4391256",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4391256",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4391256",
      "extracted_docket_number": "H-18-006 Appellant Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "11 N.E.3d 1119",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4391256 us pension / defined benefit issues h-18-006 appellant trial 11 n.e.3d 1119 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4391256-4391256"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4392209-4392209",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4392209",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4392209",
      "extracted_docket_number": "724 WDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "80 A.3d 464",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4392209 us pension / defined benefit issues 724 wda 2018 80 a.3d 464 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4392209-4392209"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4392796-4392796",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4392796",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4392796",
      "extracted_docket_number": "724 WDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "80 A.3d 464",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4392796 us pension / defined benefit issues 724 wda 2018 80 a.3d 464 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4392796-4392796"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4395731-4395731",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4395731",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "L.B. v. T.B",
      "extracted_docket_number": "28171 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4395731 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 28171 : v. : trial domestic relations order l.b. v. t.b qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4395731-4395731"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4395830-4395830",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4395830",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Porterfield",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2018-147 Douglas S. Johnston Supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "54 A.3d 525",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4395830 us pension / defined benefit issues 2018-147 douglas s. johnston supreme 54 a.3d 525 in re marriage of porterfield qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4395830-4395830"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4396240-4396240",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4396240",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Hoffman",
      "extracted_docket_number": "324 EDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4396240 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 324 eda 2017 domestic relations order in re estate of hoffman qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4396240-4396240"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4398526-4398526",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4398526",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4398526",
      "extracted_docket_number": "I The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4398526 us pension / defined benefit issues i the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4398526-4398526"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4399326-4399326",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4399326",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4399326",
      "extracted_docket_number": "28863 Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4399326 us pension / defined benefit issues 28863 appellee v qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4399326-4399326"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4399327-4399327",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4399327",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4399327",
      "extracted_docket_number": "29091 Appellant v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "925 So.2d 977",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4399327 us pension / defined benefit issues 29091 appellant v 925 so.2d 977 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4399327-4399327"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4400896-4400896",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4400896",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4400896",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2492 EDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "743 A.2d 518",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4400896 us pension / defined benefit issues 2492 eda 2018 743 a.2d 518 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4400896-4400896"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4407309-4407309",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4407309",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "HECTOR L. CASABLANCA v. ANOLAN CASABLANCA",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4407309 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order hector l. casablanca v. anolan casablanca qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4407309-4407309"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4409505-4409505",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4409505",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Nickels",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18A-DN-1693 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "935 N.E.2d 152",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4409505 us pension / defined benefit issues 18a-dn-1693 v 935 n.e.2d 152 in re marriage of nickels qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4409505-4409505"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4410159-4410159",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4410159",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4410159",
      "extracted_docket_number": "343904 Alpena Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4410159 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 343904 alpena circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4410159-4410159"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4410182-4410182",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4410182",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4410182",
      "extracted_docket_number": "28799 29104 Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4410182 us pension / defined benefit issues 28799 29104 appellee v qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4410182-4410182"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4410259-4410259",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4410259",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ZEYNAB ABDULLAHI v. GIANNI ZANINI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "124133-FL REPORTED",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "968 S.W.2d 26",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4410259 us pension / defined benefit issues 124133-fl reported 968 s.w.2d 26 zeynab abdullahi v. gianni zanini qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4410259-4410259"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4412994-4412994",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4412994",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4412994",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2697 EDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4412994 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 2697 eda 2018 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4412994-4412994"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4413045-4413045",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4413045",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Rockwell",
      "extracted_docket_number": "79065-0-1112 Although the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4413045 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 79065-0-1112 although the domestic relations order in re marriage of rockwell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4413045-4413045"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4414310-4414310",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4414310",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DOOLING v. DOOLING",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of days that the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "904 N.W.2d 251",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4414310 us pension / defined benefit issues of days that the 904 n.w.2d 251 dooling v. dooling qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4414310-4414310"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4414748-4414748",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4414748",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4414748",
      "extracted_docket_number": "05-18-00536-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "274 S.W.3d 811",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4414748 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 05-18-00536-cv 274 s.w.3d 811 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4414748-4414748"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4415871-4415871",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4415871",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4415871",
      "extracted_docket_number": "594 WDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "904 A.2d 15",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4415871 us pension / defined benefit issues 594 wda 2018 904 a.2d 15 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4415871-4415871"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4419596-4419596",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4419596",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF PAMELA LOUISE PARLEE AND JONATHAN DAVID PARLEE Upon the Petition of PAMELA LOUISE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18-1808",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "807 N.W.2d 289",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4419596 us pension / defined benefit issues 18-1808 807 n.w.2d 289 in re the marriage of pamela louise parlee and jonathan david parlee upon the petition of pamela louise qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4419596-4419596"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4423119-4423119",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4423119",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4423119",
      "extracted_docket_number": "6 MDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "201 A.3d 728",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4423119 us pension / defined benefit issues 6 mda 2019 201 a.3d 728 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4423119-4423119"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4424908-4424908",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4424908",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Zamudio",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Third District Docket No. 3-16-0537",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4424908 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues third district docket no. 3-16-0537 domestic relations order in re marriage of zamudio qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4424908-4424908"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4424912-4424912",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4424912",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Davis",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-17-2135",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "555 U.S. 285",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4424912 us pension / defined benefit issues 1-17-2135 555 u.s. 285 in re estate of davis qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4424912-4424912"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4426292-4426292",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4426292",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Marek",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18A-DR-2860 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4426292 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 18a-dr-2860 v domestic relations order in re marriage of marek qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4426292-4426292"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4426786-4426786",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4426786",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4426786",
      "extracted_docket_number": "32 EDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "647 F.3d 221",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4426786 us pension / defined benefit issues 32 eda 2019 647 f.3d 221 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4426786-4426786"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4427027-4427027",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4427027",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MALHOTRA v. MALHOTRA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 18-0403 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4427027 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 18-0403 fc malhotra v. malhotra qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4427027-4427027"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4428634-4428634",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4428634",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4428634",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-2969-16T4 JOANNA B. ORLOWSKI",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4428634 us pension / defined benefit issues a-2969-16t4 joanna b. orlowski qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4428634-4428634"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4431332-4431332",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4431332",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Russell",
      "extracted_docket_number": "sheet",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "411 S.W.3d 445",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4431332 us pension / defined benefit issues sheet 411 s.w.3d 445 in re marriage of russell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4431332-4431332"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4433168-4433168",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4433168",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "HEATHER WILSON v. MICHAEL",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4433168 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order heather wilson v. michael qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4433168-4433168"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4433527-4433527",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4433527",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4433527",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4433527 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4433527-4433527"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4434016-4434016",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4434016",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "R.M. v. L.M",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months that the pension plan participant was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "448 A.2d 223",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4434016 us pension / defined benefit issues of months that the pension plan participant was 448 a.2d 223 r.m. v. l.m qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4434016-4434016"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4434724-4434724",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4434724",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4434724",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17AP-655 2 not mature. The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4434724 us pension / defined benefit issues 17ap-655 2 not mature. the trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4434724-4434724"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4438413-4438413",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4438413",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JILL GILBERT CALLAHAN v. JAMES CALLAHAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of continuances",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "116 A.3d 317",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4438413 us pension / defined benefit issues of continuances 116 a.3d 317 jill gilbert callahan v. james callahan qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4438413-4438413"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4439149-4439149",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4439149",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4439149",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "878 N.E.2d 16",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4439149 us pension / defined benefit issues 878 n.e.2d 16 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4439149-4439149"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4439669-4439669",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4439669",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4439669",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "83 N.E.3d 999",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4439669 us pension / defined benefit issues 83 n.e.3d 999 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4439669-4439669"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4439887-4439887",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4439887",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4439887",
      "extracted_docket_number": "23628-17",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "290 U.S. 111",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4439887 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 23628-17 290 u.s. 111 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4439887-4439887"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4441033-4441033",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4441033",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4441033",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1736 WDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "167 A.3d 127",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4441033 us pension / defined benefit issues 1736 wda 2018 167 a.3d 127 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4441033-4441033"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4441854-4441854",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4441854",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4441854",
      "extracted_docket_number": "19-3001 UNITED STATES",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "460 U.S. 462",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4441854 us erisa / defined contribution issues 19-3001 united states 460 u.s. 462 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4441854-4441854"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4442202-4442202",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4442202",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DOOLING v. DOOLING",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of days that the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "904 N.W.2d 251",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4442202 us pension / defined benefit issues of days that the 904 n.w.2d 251 dooling v. dooling qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4442202-4442202"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4442959-4442959",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4442959",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Farrell & Howe",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-18-2706. This",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4442959 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1-18-2706. this domestic relations order in re marriage of farrell & howe qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4442959-4442959"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4444011-4444011",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4444011",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4444011",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4444011 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4444011-4444011"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4444404-4444404",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4444404",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4444404",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2018-CA-133 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "645 N.E.2d 1300",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4444404 us pension / defined benefit issues 2018-ca-133 : v. : trial 645 n.e.2d 1300 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4444404-4444404"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4445305-4445305",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4445305",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Farrell",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-18-2706. This",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4445305 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1-18-2706. this domestic relations order in re marriage of farrell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4445305-4445305"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4446813-4446813",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4446813",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4446813",
      "extracted_docket_number": "208 EDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "633 A.2d 589",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4446813 us pension / defined benefit issues 208 eda 2019 633 a.2d 589 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4446813-4446813"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4448715-4448715",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4448715",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4448715",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-18-1121",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "906 N.W.2d 17",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4448715 us pension / defined benefit issues a-18-1121 906 n.w.2d 17 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4448715-4448715"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4451230-4451230",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4451230",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4451230",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1877 EDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "44 A.3d 27",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4451230 us pension / defined benefit issues 1877 eda 2018 44 a.3d 27 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4451230-4451230"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4451544-4451544",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4451544",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4451544",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4451544 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4451544-4451544"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4452175-4452175",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4452175",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of SUSAN JANE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "571 S.W.3d 688",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4452175 us erisa / defined contribution issues 571 s.w.3d 688 in re the marriage of susan jane qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4452175-4452175"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4452452-4452452",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4452452",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4452452",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2019CA00010. This",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "630 N.E.2d 763",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4452452 us pension / defined benefit issues 2019ca00010. this 630 n.e.2d 763 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4452452-4452452"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4454753-4454753",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4454753",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Manor",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "276 S.W.3d 138",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4454753 us erisa / defined contribution issues 276 s.w.3d 138 in re marriage of manor qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4454753-4454753"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4455480-4455480",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4455480",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4455480",
      "extracted_docket_number": "180 EDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4455480 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 180 eda 2019 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4455480-4455480"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4458275-4458275",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4458275",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4458275",
      "extracted_docket_number": "28243 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "440 U.S. 48",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4458275 us pension / defined benefit issues 28243 : v. : trial 440 u.s. 48 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4458275-4458275"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4459221-4459221",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4459221",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4459221",
      "extracted_docket_number": "442 WDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "679 A.2d 1266",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4459221 us pension / defined benefit issues 442 wda 2019 679 a.2d 1266 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4459221-4459221"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4461567-4461567",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4461567",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Tulleners FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Judith Tulleners and Andre Tulleners",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "50 P.3d 298",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4461567 us pension / defined benefit issues 50 p.3d 298 in re marriage of tulleners facts and procedural background judith tulleners and andre tulleners qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4461567-4461567"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4462756-4462756",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4462756",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4462756",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4462756 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4462756-4462756"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4464840-4464840",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4464840",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4464840",
      "extracted_docket_number": "for",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4464840 us pension / defined benefit issues for qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4464840-4464840"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4468162-4468162",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4468162",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4468162",
      "extracted_docket_number": "19CA011472 Appellant v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4468162 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 19ca011472 appellant v domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4468162-4468162"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4470045-4470045",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4470045",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Moody",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4470045 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of moody qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4470045-4470045"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4486810-4486810",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4486810",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4486810",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2017-25242 MEMORANDUM OPINION Pamela Paredez",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "465 S.W.3d 217",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4486810 us pension / defined benefit issues 2017-25242 memorandum opinion pamela paredez 465 s.w.3d 217 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4486810-4486810"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4501795-4501795",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4501795",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4501795",
      "extracted_docket_number": "352 WDA 2019 Appellant :",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4501795 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues 352 wda 2019 appellant : domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4501795-4501795"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4502558-4502558",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4502558",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4502558",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1457 MDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "938 A.2d 246",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4502558 us pension / defined benefit issues 1457 mda 2019 938 a.2d 246 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4502558-4502558"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4504238-4504238",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4504238",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4504238",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4504238 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4504238-4504238"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4504752-4504752",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4504752",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JACOB R. BROWN AND ABBY S. BROWN Upon the Petition of JACOB R. BROWN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "19-0705",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "737 N.W.2d 97",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4504752 us pension / defined benefit issues 19-0705 737 n.w.2d 97 in re the marriage of jacob r. brown and abby s. brown upon the petition of jacob r. brown qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4504752-4504752"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4505692-4505692",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4505692",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4505692",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "573 U.S. 122",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4505692 us pension / defined benefit issues 573 u.s. 122 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4505692-4505692"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4506340-4506340",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4506340",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4506340",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-19-343",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4506340 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues a-19-343 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4506340-4506340"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4507314-4507314",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4507314",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4507314",
      "extracted_docket_number": "949 WDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "217 A.3d 301",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4507314 us pension / defined benefit issues 949 wda 2019 217 a.3d 301 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4507314-4507314"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4507624-4507624",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4507624",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4507624",
      "extracted_docket_number": "346520 Midland Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4507624 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 346520 midland circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4507624-4507624"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4508136-4508136",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4508136",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4508136",
      "extracted_docket_number": "19A-DC-827 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "7 N.E.3d 327",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4508136 us pension / defined benefit issues 19a-dc-827 v 7 n.e.3d 327 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4508136-4508136"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4511120-4511120",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4511120",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DORIS MPOYI v. RICHARD T. MPOYI",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "363 S.W.3d 479",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4511120 us pension / defined benefit issues 363 s.w.3d 479 doris mpoyi v. richard t. mpoyi qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4511120-4511120"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4511569-4511569",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4511569",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4511569",
      "extracted_docket_number": "E-19-017 Appellant Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "690 N.E.2d 535",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4511569 us pension / defined benefit issues e-19-017 appellant trial 690 n.e.2d 535 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4511569-4511569"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4512135-4512135",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4512135",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4512135",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-19-436",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "861 N.W.2d 449",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4512135 us pension / defined benefit issues a-19-436 861 n.w.2d 449 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4512135-4512135"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4520574-4520574",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4520574",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4520574",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4520574 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4520574-4520574"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4521088-4521088",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4521088",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Duckworth",
      "extracted_docket_number": "19A-DC-2123 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "14 N.E.3d 854",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4521088 us erisa / defined contribution issues 19a-dc-2123 v 14 n.e.3d 854 in re marriage of duckworth qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4521088-4521088"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4527607-4527607",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4527607",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Cooper",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "793 P.2d 810",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4527607 us pension / defined benefit issues 793 p.2d 810 in re marriage of cooper qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4527607-4527607"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4528041-4528041",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4528041",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LORAIN COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. HAYNES",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "724 N.E.2d 410",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4528041 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 724 n.e.2d 410 lorain county bar association v. haynes qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4528041-4528041"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4530374-4530374",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4530374",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4530374",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1879 MDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "938 A.2d 246",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4530374 us pension / defined benefit issues 1879 mda 2019 938 a.2d 246 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4530374-4530374"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4531948-4531948",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4531948",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4531948",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4531948 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4531948-4531948"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4534579-4534579",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4534579",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4534579",
      "extracted_docket_number": "346790 Oakland Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4534579 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 346790 oakland circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4534579-4534579"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4535263-4535263",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4535263",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4535263",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "972 N.E.2d 359",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4535263 us pension / defined benefit issues 972 n.e.2d 359 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4535263-4535263"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4535737-4535737",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4535737",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Thompson",
      "extracted_docket_number": "35888-7-III In re the Marriage of: Kulesza .... The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "64 P.3d 92",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4535737 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 35888-7-iii in re the marriage of: kulesza .... the 64 p.3d 92 in re marriage of thompson qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4535737-4535737"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4535852-4535852",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4535852",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "PAMELA A. DOBBINS v. MARK J. DOBBINS HUMPHREY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "190 A.3d 244",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4535852 us pension / defined benefit issues 190 a.3d 244 pamela a. dobbins v. mark j. dobbins humphrey qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4535852-4535852"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4538382-4538382",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4538382",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4538382",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20190300",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "673 N.W.2d 261",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4538382 us pension / defined benefit issues 20190300 673 n.w.2d 261 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4538382-4538382"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4539763-4539763",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4539763",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4539763",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20190300",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "673 N.W.2d 261",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4539763 us pension / defined benefit issues 20190300 673 n.w.2d 261 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4539763-4539763"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4541435-4541435",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4541435",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4541435",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1324 MDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "783 A.2d 807",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4541435 us pension / defined benefit issues 1324 mda 2019 783 a.2d 807 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4541435-4541435"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4544345-4544345",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4544345",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4544345",
      "extracted_docket_number": "347143 Oakland Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4544345 us pension / defined benefit issues 347143 oakland circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4544345-4544345"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4544348-4544348",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4544348",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4544348",
      "extracted_docket_number": "344636 St. Joseph Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4544348 us pension / defined benefit issues 344636 st. joseph circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4544348-4544348"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4544656-4544656",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4544656",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4544656",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1:18-cv-04083-ODE WANDA CROWDER",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "644 F.3d 1350",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4544656 us pension / defined benefit issues 1:18-cv-04083-ode wanda crowder 644 f.3d 1350 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4544656-4544656"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4544765-4544765",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4544765",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4544765",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1:18-cv-04083-ODE WANDA CROWDER",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "644 F.3d 1350",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4544765 us pension / defined benefit issues 1:18-cv-04083-ode wanda crowder 644 f.3d 1350 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4544765-4544765"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4551692-4551692",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4551692",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4551692",
      "extracted_docket_number": "29184 29185 Appellee 29219 29328 v. WILLIAM H. KALBAUGH",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "159 U.S. 651",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4551692 us pension / defined benefit issues 29184 29185 appellee 29219 29328 v. william h. kalbaugh 159 u.s. 651 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4551692-4551692"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4552475-4552475",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4552475",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4552475",
      "extracted_docket_number": "29184 29185 Appellee 29219 29328 v. WILLIAM H. KALBAUGH",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "159 U.S. 651",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4552475 us pension / defined benefit issues 29184 29185 appellee 29219 29328 v. william h. kalbaugh 159 u.s. 651 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4552475-4552475"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4552847-4552847",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4552847",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4552847",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4552847 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues of years domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4552847-4552847"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4556236-4556236",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4556236",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4556236",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "813 F.2d 1574",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4556236 us pension / defined benefit issues 813 f.2d 1574 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4556236-4556236"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4556792-4556792",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4556792",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JODIE LYNN DICKEY AND WILLIAM MARK DICKEY Upon the Petition of JODIE LYNN DICKEY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "19-0097",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "827 N.W.2d 671",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4556792 us pension / defined benefit issues 19-0097 827 n.w.2d 671 in re the marriage of jodie lynn dickey and william mark dickey upon the petition of jodie lynn dickey qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4556792-4556792"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-45572-45572",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 45572",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 45572",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "151 F.3d 396",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 45572 us pension / defined benefit issues 151 f.3d 396 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-45572-45572"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4561527-4561527",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4561527",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4561527",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20A-DC-441 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4561527 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 20a-dc-441 v domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4561527-4561527"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4561989-4561989",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4561989",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4561989",
      "extracted_docket_number": "991 WDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "575 A.2d 550",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4561989 us pension / defined benefit issues 991 wda 2018 575 a.2d 550 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4561989-4561989"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4563638-4563638",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4563638",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4563638",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1411 MDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4563638 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1411 mda 2019 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4563638-4563638"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4565168-4565168",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4565168",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LOIS R. STILKEY v. ELIZABETH A. ZEMBKO",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "18 A.3d 604",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4565168 us pension / defined benefit issues 18 a.3d 604 lois r. stilkey v. elizabeth a. zembko qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4565168-4565168"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4565171-4565171",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4565171",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "NANCY GIORDANO v. RAY GIORDANO",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "111 A.3d 551",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4565171 us pension / defined benefit issues 111 a.3d 551 nancy giordano v. ray giordano qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4565171-4565171"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4566216-4566216",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4566216",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of DAVID MICHAEL",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4566216 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of david michael qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4566216-4566216"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4568648-4568648",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4568648",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR DAVID FERRELL BYRD APPELLANT APPEAL FROM METCALFE CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE MIKE MCKOWN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2019-CA-000540-MR DAVID FERRELL BYRD APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "712 S.W.2d 947",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4568648 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2019-ca-000540-mr david ferrell byrd appellant 712 s.w.2d 947 mr david ferrell byrd appellant appeal from metcalfe circuit court v. honorable mike mckown qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4568648-4568648"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4571226-4571226",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4571226",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Fisher",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20A-DR-338 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "49 N.E.3d 1065",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4571226 us pension / defined benefit issues 20a-dr-338 v 49 n.e.3d 1065 in re marriage of fisher qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4571226-4571226"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4574826-4574826",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4574826",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "N.A.M. v. M.P.W",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2453 EDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4574826 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 2453 eda 2019 domestic relations order n.a.m. v. m.p.w qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4574826-4574826"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4580132-4580132",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4580132",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4580132",
      "extracted_docket_number": "28848 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4580132 us pension / defined benefit issues 28848 : v. : trial qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4580132-4580132"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4581089-4581089",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4581089",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4581089",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "371 N.E.2d 214",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4581089 us pension / defined benefit issues 371 n.e.2d 214 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4581089-4581089"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4581811-4581811",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4581811",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4581811",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "25 N.E.3d 371",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4581811 us pension / defined benefit issues 25 n.e.3d 371 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4581811-4581811"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4582452-4582452",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4582452",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of JOANNE and",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4582452 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order in re the marriage of joanne and qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4582452-4582452"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4583604-4583604",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4583604",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF THOMAS DEAN NICHOLS AND TERESA LORRAINE NICHOLS Upon the Petition of THOMAS DEAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20-0556",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4583604 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 20-0556 domestic relations order in re the marriage of thomas dean nichols and teresa lorraine nichols upon the petition of thomas dean qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4583604-4583604"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4586529-4586529",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4586529",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "APPENDIX STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. PETER SEBBEN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "CV-XX-XXXXXXX-S Memorandum",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4586529 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues cv-xx-xxxxxxx-s memorandum domestic relations order appendix state of connecticut v. peter sebben qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4586529-4586529"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4586532-4586532",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4586532",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ALINA LEONOVA v. STANISLAV LEONOV",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of postdissolution motions",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "908 A.2d 1119",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4586532 us erisa / defined contribution issues of postdissolution motions 908 a.2d 1119 alina leonova v. stanislav leonov qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4586532-4586532"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4635999-4635999",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4635999",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Budorick",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4635999 us pension / defined benefit issues in re marriage of budorick qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4635999-4635999"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4638126-4638126",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4638126",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF CHRISTI ANN FERRIS AND JOEL DAVID FERRIS Upon the Petition of CHRISTI ANN FERRIS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20-0266",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "912 N.W.2d 444",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4638126 us pension / defined benefit issues 20-0266 912 n.w.2d 444 in re the marriage of christi ann ferris and joel david ferris upon the petition of christi ann ferris qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4638126-4638126"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4640424-4640424",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4640424",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4640424",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-20-192",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "744 N.W.2d 444",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4640424 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues a-20-192 744 n.w.2d 444 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4640424-4640424"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4642138-4642138",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4642138",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4642138",
      "extracted_docket_number": "236 WDA 2020",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "898 A.2d 1141",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4642138 us pension / defined benefit issues 236 wda 2020 898 a.2d 1141 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4642138-4642138"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4643517-4643517",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4643517",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Lay",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20A-DC-845 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "120 N.E.3d 1083",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4643517 us pension / defined benefit issues 20a-dc-845 v 120 n.e.3d 1083 in re marriage of lay qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4643517-4643517"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4644016-4644016",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4644016",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "C.D.G. v. N.J.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2016-CA-0392 OLDHAM CIRCUIT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "35 S.W.3d 841",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4644016 us pension / defined benefit issues 2016-ca-0392 oldham circuit 35 s.w.3d 841 c.d.g. v. n.j.s qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4644016-4644016"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4647367-4647367",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4647367",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "STOCK v. STOCK",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 20-0015 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4647367 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 20-0015 fc domestic relations order stock v. stock qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4647367-4647367"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4647639-4647639",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4647639",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Knoerr",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-19-0929 Opinion",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4647639 us pension / defined benefit issues 2-19-0929 opinion in re marriage of knoerr qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4647639-4647639"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4647870-4647870",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4647870",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4647870",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "645 N.E.2d 1300",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4647870 us pension / defined benefit issues 645 n.e.2d 1300 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4647870-4647870"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4648598-4648598",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4648598",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Joyner",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "351 S.W.3d 552",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4648598 us pension / defined benefit issues 351 s.w.3d 552 in re marriage of joyner qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4648598-4648598"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4649198-4649198",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4649198",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4649198",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3555 EDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "854 A.2d 597",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4649198 us pension / defined benefit issues 3555 eda 2019 854 a.2d 597 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4649198-4649198"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4649655-4649655",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4649655",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "BECKSTEAD v. OPM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "819 F.2d 1113",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4649655 us pension / defined benefit issues 819 f.2d 1113 beckstead v. opm qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4649655-4649655"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4652193-4652193",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4652193",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4652193",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15 DR 0011",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4652193 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 15 dr 0011 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4652193-4652193"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4652971-4652971",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4652971",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "STOCK v. STOCK",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 20-0015 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4652971 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 20-0015 fc domestic relations order stock v. stock qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4652971-4652971"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4653189-4653189",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4653189",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF SURAJ GEORGE PAZHOOR AND HANCY CHENNIKKARA PAZHOOR Upon the Petition of SURAJ",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20-0090",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4653189 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues 20-0090 domestic relations order in re the marriage of suraj george pazhoor and hancy chennikkara pazhoor upon the petition of suraj qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4653189-4653189"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4653190-4653190",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4653190",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MATTHEW TAIT MILLER AND KARRI ANN MILLER Upon the Petition of MATTHEW TAIT MILLER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "19-0969",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 N.W.2d 252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4653190 us pension / defined benefit issues 19-0969 545 n.w.2d 252 in re the marriage of matthew tait miller and karri ann miller upon the petition of matthew tait miller qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4653190-4653190"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4653646-4653646",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4653646",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SAMUEL LEE BACHELOR JR. v. AJA MICHELE BACHELOR N",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "535 S.W.3d 467",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4653646 us pension / defined benefit issues 535 s.w.3d 467 samuel lee bachelor jr. v. aja michele bachelor n qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4653646-4653646"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4656355-4656355",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4656355",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of JODY L. and ROBERT J. PALLO. JODY L. PALLO",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "555 U.S. 285",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4656355 us pension / defined benefit issues 555 u.s. 285 in re marriage of jody l. and robert j. pallo. jody l. pallo qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4656355-4656355"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4657764-4657764",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4657764",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "HIGGINS v. CURRIER",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 N.W.2d 838",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4657764 us erisa / defined contribution issues 937 n.w.2d 838 higgins v. currier qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4657764-4657764"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4658208-4658208",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4658208",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Joyner",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4658208 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order in re marriage of joyner qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4658208-4658208"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4661313-4661313",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4661313",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4661313",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entry 143",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "935 F.2d 1114",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4661313 us pension / defined benefit issues entry 143 935 f.2d 1114 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4661313-4661313"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4664986-4664986",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4664986",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SEMBOWER v. SEMBOWER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 20-0210 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4664986 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 20-0210 fc sembower v. sembower qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4664986-4664986"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4665913-4665913",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4665913",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4665913",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-20-380",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "892 N.W.2d 100",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4665913 us erisa / defined contribution issues a-20-380 892 n.w.2d 100 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4665913-4665913"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4671816-4671816",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4671816",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR JOHNNY WADE BELL APPELLANT APPEAL FROM BARREN FAMILY COURT v. HONORABLE MIKE MCKOWN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2020-CA-0017-MR JOHNNY WADE BELL APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "536 S.W.3d 191",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4671816 us pension / defined benefit issues 2020-ca-0017-mr johnny wade bell appellant 536 s.w.3d 191 mr johnny wade bell appellant appeal from barren family court v. honorable mike mckown qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4671816-4671816"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4672360-4672360",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4672360",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4672360",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "414 S.W.3d 685",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4672360 us pension / defined benefit issues 414 s.w.3d 685 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4672360-4672360"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4672678-4672678",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4672678",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4672678",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "615 N.E.2d 689",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4672678 us pension / defined benefit issues 615 n.e.2d 689 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4672678-4672678"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4673224-4673224",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4673224",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4673224",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "3 N.E.3d 179",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4673224 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 3 n.e.3d 179 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4673224-4673224"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4674208-4674208",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4674208",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4674208",
      "extracted_docket_number": "28961 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 N.E.2d 1077",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4674208 us pension / defined benefit issues 28961 : v. : trial 937 n.e.2d 1077 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4674208-4674208"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4679107-4679107",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4679107",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Tang",
      "extracted_docket_number": "54219-6-II A. LEGAL PRINCIPLES We review the superior",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "836 P.2d 832",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4679107 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 54219-6-ii a. legal principles we review the superior 836 p.2d 832 in re marriage of tang qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4679107-4679107"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4679831-4679831",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4679831",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "GPC-MSB v. CARLA YOUNG",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4679831 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues domestic relations order gpc-msb v. carla young qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4679831-4679831"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4681046-4681046",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4681046",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4681046",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4681046 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4681046-4681046"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4681733-4681733",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4681733",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF ADRIANA SIKYTA AND JASON SIKYTA Upon the Petition of ADRIANA SIKYTA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "19-2136",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 N.W.2d 252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4681733 us pension / defined benefit issues 19-2136 545 n.w.2d 252 in re the marriage of adriana sikyta and jason sikyta upon the petition of adriana sikyta qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4681733-4681733"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4681734-4681734",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4681734",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JEFFERY MAU AND ANN MARIE MAU Upon the Petition of JEFFERY MAU",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20-1422",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 N.W.2d 252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4681734 us pension / defined benefit issues 20-1422 545 n.w.2d 252 in re the marriage of jeffery mau and ann marie mau upon the petition of jeffery mau qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4681734-4681734"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4682042-4682042",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4682042",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of McDonald",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4682042 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of mcdonald qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4682042-4682042"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4682306-4682306",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4682306",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "C.D.G. v. N.J.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2016-CA-0392 OLDHAM CIRCUIT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "35 S.W.3d 841",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4682306 us pension / defined benefit issues 2016-ca-0392 oldham circuit 35 s.w.3d 841 c.d.g. v. n.j.s qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4682306-4682306"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4682678-4682678",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4682678",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4682678",
      "extracted_docket_number": "353272 Grand Traverse Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4682678 us pension / defined benefit issues 353272 grand traverse circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4682678-4682678"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4682977-4682977",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4682977",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of STEPHEN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "126 Cal.App.4th 726",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4682977 us pension / defined benefit issues 126 cal.app.4th 726 in re the marriage of stephen qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4682977-4682977"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4683294-4683294",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4683294",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "MARY CUNNINGHAM v. GERARD CUNNINGHAM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4683294 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order mary cunningham v. gerard cunningham qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4683294-4683294"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4683781-4683781",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4683781",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "HILLMAN v. HILLMAN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 20-0121 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4683781 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 20-0121 fc hillman v. hillman qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4683781-4683781"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4686239-4686239",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4686239",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF SHIRLEY A. FLAHERTY AND JEFFREY B. FLAHERTY Upon the Petition of SHIRLEY A",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20-0068",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4686239 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 20-0068 domestic relations order in re the marriage of shirley a. flaherty and jeffrey b. flaherty upon the petition of shirley a qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4686239-4686239"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4688382-4688382",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4688382",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Heroy",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4688382 us pension / defined benefit issues in re marriage of heroy qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4688382-4688382"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4688963-4688963",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4688963",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR KEVIN NEAL CROSS-APPELLANT CROSS-APPEAL FROM MCCRACKEN CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE DEANNA WISE HENSCHEL",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "540 S.W.3d 384",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4688963 us pension / defined benefit issues 540 s.w.3d 384 mr kevin neal cross-appellant cross-appeal from mccracken circuit court v. honorable deanna wise henschel qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4688963-4688963"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4691646-4691646",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4691646",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "VERZAL v. VERZAL",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "906 N.W.2d 300",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4691646 us pension / defined benefit issues 906 n.w.2d 300 verzal v. verzal qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4691646-4691646"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4693031-4693031",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4693031",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of MacAnally",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20CA0038 El Paso County District",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "20 P.3d 1197",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4693031 us pension / defined benefit issues 20ca0038 el paso county district 20 p.3d 1197 in re estate of macanally qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4693031-4693031"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4693299-4693299",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4693299",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4693299",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20-1034C",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "787 F.2d 1569",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4693299 us pension / defined benefit issues 20-1034c 787 f.2d 1569 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension military_retirement public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4693299-4693299"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4693688-4693688",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4693688",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4693688",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20-1034C",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "787 F.2d 1569",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4693688 us pension / defined benefit issues 20-1034c 787 f.2d 1569 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension military_retirement public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4693688-4693688"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4696072-4696072",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4696072",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "T.C. v. K.C",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20 NO 0472 Civil",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4696072 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20 no 0472 civil domestic relations order t.c. v. k.c qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4696072-4696072"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4696743-4696743",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4696743",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4696743",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "960 F.3d 736",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4696743 us erisa / defined contribution issues 960 f.3d 736 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4696743-4696743"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4700508-4700508",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4700508",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "GARCIA v. GARCIA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 20-0524 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4700508 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 20-0524 fc garcia v. garcia qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4700508-4700508"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4701742-4701742",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4701742",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4701742",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4701742 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4701742-4701742"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4703080-4703080",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4703080",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4703080",
      "extracted_docket_number": "from 12 years earlier. He said that he had not retr",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "166 N.E.3d 1180",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4703080 us pension / defined benefit issues from 12 years earlier. he said that he had not retr 166 n.e.3d 1180 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4703080-4703080"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4704361-4704361",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4704361",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING v. PETITIONS FOR BOSCHAL LEE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "18 Cal.App.5th 340",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4704361 us pension / defined benefit issues 18 cal.app.5th 340 order modifying opinion and denying v. petitions for boschal lee qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4704361-4704361"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4704636-4704636",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4704636",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Trigg",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4704636 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re estate of trigg qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4704636-4704636"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4705297-4705297",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4705297",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF ANGELA JO TOWNE AND LARRY DEAN TOWNE Upon the Petition of ANGELA JO TOWNE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20-0829",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "827 N.W.2d 671",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4705297 us erisa / defined contribution issues 20-0829 827 n.w.2d 671 in re the marriage of angela jo towne and larry dean towne upon the petition of angela jo towne qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4705297-4705297"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4706389-4706389",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4706389",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "GINGER LOUGENE HUTSELL DENTON v. STEVEN LEE DENTON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "32 S.W.3d 222",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4706389 us pension / defined benefit issues 32 s.w.3d 222 ginger lougene hutsell denton v. steven lee denton qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4706389-4706389"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4706807-4706807",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4706807",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "NITSCH v. KLAVUHN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 20-0622 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4706807 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 20-0622 fc nitsch v. klavuhn qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4706807-4706807"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4707969-4707969",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4707969",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CORNWELL v. CORNWELL",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4707969 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order cornwell v. cornwell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4707969-4707969"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4709641-4709641",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4709641",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR TODD A. DREXEL APPELLANT APPEAL FROM WARREN CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE CATHERINE R. HOLDERFIELD",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2020-CA-0422-MR TODD A. DREXEL APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "542 S.W.3d 286",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4709641 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2020-ca-0422-mr todd a. drexel appellant 542 s.w.3d 286 mr todd a. drexel appellant appeal from warren circuit court v. honorable catherine r. holderfield qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4709641-4709641"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4709648-4709648",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4709648",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR ANGELA FERNANDEZ APPELLANT APPEAL FROM WARREN CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE STEVE ALAN WILSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2020-CA-0302-MR ANGELA FERNANDEZ APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "586 S.W.3d 737",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4709648 us pension / defined benefit issues 2020-ca-0302-mr angela fernandez appellant 586 s.w.3d 737 mr angela fernandez appellant appeal from warren circuit court v. honorable steve alan wilson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4709648-4709648"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4710461-4710461",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4710461",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4710461",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4710461 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4710461-4710461"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4765562-4765562",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4765562",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4765562",
      "extracted_docket_number": "350739 Wayne Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4765562 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 350739 wayne circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4765562-4765562"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4765651-4765651",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4765651",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "MR CHARLES ROBERT RUSSELBURG APPELLANT APPEAL FROM DAVIESS CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE JULIA H. GORDON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2020-CA-1287-MR CHARLES ROBERT RUSSELBURG APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4765651 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 2020-ca-1287-mr charles robert russelburg appellant domestic relations order mr charles robert russelburg appellant appeal from daviess circuit court v. honorable julia h. gordon qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4765651-4765651"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4765652-4765652",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4765652",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR CHARLES F. MAHL APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE GINA KAY CALVERT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2019-CA-0874-MR CHARLES F. MAHL APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "168 S.W.2d 738",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4765652 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2019-ca-0874-mr charles f. mahl appellant 168 s.w.2d 738 mr charles f. mahl appellant appeal from jefferson circuit court v. honorable gina kay calvert qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4765652-4765652"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4765662-4765662",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4765662",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4765662",
      "extracted_docket_number": "R.C. 3105.18 allows a",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "947 N.E.2d 1317",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4765662 us pension / defined benefit issues r.c. 3105.18 allows a 947 n.e.2d 1317 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4765662-4765662"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4765925-4765925",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4765925",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4765925",
      "extracted_docket_number": "14-19-00646-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "361 S.W.3d 615",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4765925 us pension / defined benefit issues 14-19-00646-cv 361 s.w.3d 615 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4765925-4765925"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4772550-4772550",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4772550",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4772550",
      "extracted_docket_number": "350739 Wayne Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4772550 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 350739 wayne circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4772550-4772550"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4880167-4880167",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4880167",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MARN SUZANNE LARSEN-BALL v. WILLIAM GORDON BALL",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "301 S.W.3d 228",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4880167 us pension / defined benefit issues 301 s.w.3d 228 marn suzanne larsen-ball v. william gordon ball qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4880167-4880167"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4908254-4908254",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4908254",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "GRAYSON v. ELMER WAYNE GRAYSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "556 S.W.3d 219",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4908254 us pension / defined benefit issues 556 s.w.3d 219 grayson v. elmer wayne grayson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4908254-4908254"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4908755-4908755",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4908755",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Wagner",
      "extracted_docket_number": "56. 5 The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "711 P.2d 1384",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4908755 us pension / defined benefit issues 56. 5 the 711 p.2d 1384 in re marriage of wagner qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4908755-4908755"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4911389-4911389",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4911389",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of McDonald",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "219 S.W.3d 97",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4911389 us pension / defined benefit issues 219 s.w.3d 97 in re marriage of mcdonald qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4911389-4911389"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4912212-4912212",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4912212",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4912212",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "96 S.W.3d 227",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4912212 us erisa / defined contribution issues 96 s.w.3d 227 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4912212-4912212"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4912251-4912251",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4912251",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4912251",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2019-33496 MEMORANDUM OPINION This",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "555 S.W.3d 539",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4912251 us pension / defined benefit issues 2019-33496 memorandum opinion this 555 s.w.3d 539 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4912251-4912251"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4912486-4912486",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4912486",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Reinauer",
      "extracted_docket_number": "sheet from when the decree was rendered. 3 Award to",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4912486 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues sheet from when the decree was rendered. 3 award to domestic relations order in re marriage of reinauer qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4912486-4912486"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4994886-4994886",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4994886",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "BETH E. ANKETELL v. MARTIN KULLDORFF",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of grants that he applies for and receives. The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "99 A.3d 1206",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4994886 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues of grants that he applies for and receives. the 99 a.3d 1206 beth e. anketell v. martin kulldorff qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4994886-4994886"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5116129-5116129",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5116129",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of NANCY and BRYAN MCKINNEY. NANCY MCKINNEY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "4 Cal.App.5th 574",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5116129 us pension / defined benefit issues 4 cal.app.5th 574 in re the marriage of nancy and bryan mckinney. nancy mckinney qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5116129-5116129"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5117095-5117095",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5117095",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "GILREATH v. CONNER. REESE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5117095 us pension / defined benefit issues gilreath v. conner. reese qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5117095-5117095"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5119999-5119999",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5119999",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "MINER v. MINER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 21-0155 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5119999 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 21-0155 fc domestic relations order miner v. miner qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5119999-5119999"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5122404-5122404",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5122404",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5122404",
      "extracted_docket_number": "12-21-01",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "791 N.E.2d 434",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5122404 us erisa / defined contribution issues 12-21-01 791 n.e.2d 434 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5122404-5122404"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5125604-5125604",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5125604",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CYNTHIA LAWRENCE v. THOMAS LAWRENCE",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "193 S.W.3d 495",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5125604 us erisa / defined contribution issues 193 s.w.3d 495 cynthia lawrence v. thomas lawrence qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5125604-5125604"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5126331-5126331",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5126331",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "KELLY v. KELLY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 20-0441 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5126331 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 20-0441 fc domestic relations order kelly v. kelly qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5126331-5126331"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5128056-5128056",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5128056",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5128056",
      "extracted_docket_number": "477 M.D. 2020 : Bedford Pa",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "217 A.3d 289",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5128056 us pension / defined benefit issues 477 m.d. 2020 : bedford pa 217 a.3d 289 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5128056-5128056"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5129655-5129655",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5129655",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5129655",
      "extracted_docket_number": "48414 XIOMARA ROBIRDS",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "454 P.3d 1092",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5129655 us erisa / defined contribution issues 48414 xiomara robirds 454 p.3d 1092 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5129655-5129655"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5129937-5129937",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5129937",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DEBORAH P. LINN v. MARK A. LINN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "350 S.W.3d 99",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5129937 us erisa / defined contribution issues 350 s.w.3d 99 deborah p. linn v. mark a. linn qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5129937-5129937"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5132400-5132400",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5132400",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5132400",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years that the spouse was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5132400 us pension / defined benefit issues of years that the spouse was qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5132400-5132400"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5133423-5133423",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5133423",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5133423",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5133423 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5133423-5133423"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5137000-5137000",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5137000",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Mansell",
      "extracted_docket_number": "for six months",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5137000 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues for six months domestic relations order in re marriage of mansell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5137000-5137000"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5137352-5137352",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5137352",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hunt",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "745 P.2d 830",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5137352 us pension / defined benefit issues 745 p.2d 830 in re marriage of hunt qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5137352-5137352"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5138161-5138161",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5138161",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5138161",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20140179-CA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "270 P.3d 556",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5138161 us pension / defined benefit issues 20140179-ca 270 p.3d 556 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5138161-5138161"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5138195-5138195",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5138195",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5138195",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20140196-CA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "656 P.2d 431",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5138195 us pension / defined benefit issues 20140196-ca 656 p.2d 431 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5138195-5138195"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5138637-5138637",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5138637",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "A.S. v. R.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20170606-CA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "392 P.3d 985",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5138637 us pension / defined benefit issues 20170606-ca 392 p.3d 985 a.s. v. r.s qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5138637-5138637"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5138864-5138864",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5138864",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5138864",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20170956-CA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "294 P.3d 600",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5138864 us erisa / defined contribution issues 20170956-ca 294 p.3d 600 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5138864-5138864"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5138903-5138903",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5138903",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LLC v. BBRD",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20170541-CA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "907 P.2d 264",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5138903 us pension / defined benefit issues 20170541-ca 907 p.2d 264 llc v. bbrd qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5138903-5138903"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5139167-5139167",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5139167",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5139167",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20180732-CA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "392 P.3d 985",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5139167 us pension / defined benefit issues 20180732-ca 392 p.3d 985 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5139167-5139167"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5139447-5139447",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5139447",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of NARAYANAN KARUPPIAH and ROSALIN THURAIRAJAH",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "216 Cal.App.2d 260",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5139447 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 216 cal.app.2d 260 in re the marriage of narayanan karuppiah and rosalin thurairajah qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5139447-5139447"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5141542-5141542",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5141542",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MINDIOLA v. MINDIOLA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 21-0271 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "176 A.3d 1124",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5141542 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 21-0271 fc 176 a.3d 1124 mindiola v. mindiola qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5141542-5141542"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5515838-5515838",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5515838",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5515838",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "152 S.W.3d 556",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5515838 us erisa / defined contribution issues 152 s.w.3d 556 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5515838-5515838"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-58537-58537",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 58537",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 58537",
      "extracted_docket_number": "06-40570",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 58537 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 06-40570 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-58537-58537"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6105001-6105001",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6105001",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6105001",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "193 S.W.3d 495",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6105001 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 193 s.w.3d 495 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6105001-6105001"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6111749-6111749",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6111749",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of McDonald",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entry neither was memorialized as a signed order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6111749 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues entry neither was memorialized as a signed order domestic relations order in re marriage of mcdonald qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6111749-6111749"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6112301-6112301",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6112301",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6112301",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6112301 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6112301-6112301"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6113868-6113868",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6113868",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6113868",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-20-00118-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "423 S.W.3d 493",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6113868 us pension / defined benefit issues 13-20-00118-cv 423 s.w.3d 493 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6113868-6113868"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-617924-617924",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 617924",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 617924",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10-1862-cv",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "389 F.3d 386",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 617924 us pension / defined benefit issues 10-1862-cv 389 f.3d 386 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-617924-617924"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-619740-619740",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 619740",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 619740",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10-1862-cv",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "389 F.3d 386",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 619740 us pension / defined benefit issues 10-1862-cv 389 f.3d 386 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-619740-619740"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6216832-6216832",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6216832",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6216832",
      "extracted_docket_number": "558 WDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "652 A.2d 393",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6216832 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 558 wda 2021 652 a.2d 393 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6216832-6216832"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6216834-6216834",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6216834",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ROBERT MARTIN THOMPSON v. CHRISTIE LEE THOMPSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "represented by the numerator",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 S.W.2d 823",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6216834 us pension / defined benefit issues represented by the numerator 937 s.w.2d 823 robert martin thompson v. christie lee thompson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6216834-6216834"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6226370-6226370",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6226370",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF GARY E. ERLANDSON AND SUSAN KAY ERLANDSON Upon the Petition of GARY E. ERLANDSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20-1607",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "137 S. Ct. 1400",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6226370 us pension / defined benefit issues 20-1607 137 s. ct. 1400 in re the marriage of gary e. erlandson and susan kay erlandson upon the petition of gary e. erlandson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6226370-6226370"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-625735-625735",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 625735",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 625735",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 625735 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-625735-625735"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6316773-6316773",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6316773",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6316773",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6316773 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6316773-6316773"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6317067-6317067",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6317067",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "AGUINIGA v. AGUINIGA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 21-0221 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6317067 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 21-0221 fc aguiniga v. aguiniga qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6317067-6317067"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6317746-6317746",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6317746",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of ADALBERTO and GEMMA TORRES",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6317746 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order in re the marriage of adalberto and gemma torres qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6317746-6317746"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6319404-6319404",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6319404",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6319404",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "136 N.E.3d 460",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6319404 us pension / defined benefit issues 136 n.e.3d 460 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6319404-6319404"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6320684-6320684",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6320684",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "J.K. v. A.K",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "276 S.W.3d 138",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6320684 us pension / defined benefit issues 276 s.w.3d 138 j.k. v. a.k qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6320684-6320684"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6320935-6320935",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6320935",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LLC v. MEJ",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "27 S.W.3d 913",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6320935 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 27 s.w.3d 913 llc v. mej qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6320935-6320935"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6321520-6321520",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6321520",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6321520",
      "extracted_docket_number": "666 WDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "935 A.2d 547",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6321520 us pension / defined benefit issues 666 wda 2021 935 a.2d 547 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6321520-6321520"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6323829-6323829",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6323829",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6323829",
      "extracted_docket_number": "786 WDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "799 A.2d 155",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6323829 us pension / defined benefit issues 786 wda 2021 799 a.2d 155 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6323829-6323829"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6328221-6328221",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6328221",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF ALISA DANAE SUNDBY AND TAYLOR RAY SUNDBY Upon the Petition of ALISA DANAE SUNDBY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20-1552",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "943 N.W.2d 15",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6328221 us erisa / defined contribution issues 20-1552 943 n.w.2d 15 in re the marriage of alisa danae sundby and taylor ray sundby upon the petition of alisa danae sundby qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6328221-6328221"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6329729-6329729",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6329729",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Davis",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entry order of May 22",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "885 N.E.2d 1053",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6329729 us pension / defined benefit issues entry order of may 22 885 n.e.2d 1053 in re marriage of davis qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6329729-6329729"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6329974-6329974",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6329974",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6329974",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1: The trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "69 N.E.3d 664",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6329974 us pension / defined benefit issues 1: the trial 69 n.e.3d 664 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6329974-6329974"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6330478-6330478",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6330478",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Santopadre",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of Units",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "840 S.W.2d 952",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6330478 us pension / defined benefit issues of units 840 s.w.2d 952 in re marriage of santopadre qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6330478-6330478"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6330814-6330814",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6330814",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6330814",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21-0216",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "555 U.S. 285",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6330814 us pension / defined benefit issues 21-0216 555 u.s. 285 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6330814-6330814"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6334245-6334245",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6334245",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of CANDY and TERENCE BONNER",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "137 S.Ct. 577",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6334245 us pension / defined benefit issues 137 s.ct. 577 in re the marriage of candy and terence bonner qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6334245-6334245"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6335438-6335438",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6335438",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6335438",
      "extracted_docket_number": "316 MDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "184 A.3d 168",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6335438 us pension / defined benefit issues 316 mda 2021 184 a.3d 168 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6335438-6335438"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6337686-6337686",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6337686",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6337686",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6337686 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6337686-6337686"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6341398-6341398",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6341398",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CHRISTOFF v. CHRISTOFF",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 21-0559 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6341398 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 21-0559 fc christoff v. christoff qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6341398-6341398"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6343228-6343228",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6343228",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6343228",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "573 S.W.2d 181",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6343228 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 573 s.w.2d 181 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6343228-6343228"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6343790-6343790",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6343790",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF KURT E. STEPANIAK AND JACQUELINE S. STEPANIAK Upon the Petition of KURT E",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21-0726",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "966 N.W.2d 630",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6343790 us pension / defined benefit issues 21-0726 966 n.w.2d 630 in re the marriage of kurt e. stepaniak and jacqueline s. stepaniak upon the petition of kurt e qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6343790-6343790"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6345584-6345584",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6345584",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Goldberg",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "210 Cal.App.4th 1423",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6345584 us pension / defined benefit issues 210 cal.app.4th 1423 in re marriage of goldberg qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6345584-6345584"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6346091-6346091",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6346091",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "MILHAM v. MILHAM",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 21-0581 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6346091 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 21-0581 fc domestic relations order milham v. milham qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6346091-6346091"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6346131-6346131",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6346131",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6346131",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1102 WDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "209 A.3d 367",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6346131 us pension / defined benefit issues 1102 wda 2021 209 a.3d 367 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6346131-6346131"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6348138-6348138",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6348138",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Salviola",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-21-0466 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6348138 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2-21-0466 order in re marriage of salviola qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6348138-6348138"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6350709-6350709",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6350709",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6350709",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1. Col. Leveille completed 20 years of service",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6350709 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1. col. leveille completed 20 years of service domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension military_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6350709-6350709"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6350808-6350808",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6350808",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6350808",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6350808 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6350808-6350808"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6351031-6351031",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6351031",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Moore",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "133 S.W.3d 217",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6351031 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 133 s.w.3d 217 in re marriage of moore qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6351031-6351031"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6351763-6351763",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6351763",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of MELINDA and JOHN F. SHEGA",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "37 Cal.3d 762",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6351763 us pension / defined benefit issues 37 cal.3d 762 in re the marriage of melinda and john f. shega qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6351763-6351763"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6495459-6495459",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6495459",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6495459",
      "extracted_docket_number": "indicating that the clerk served it on him",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "156 N.E.3d 932",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6495459 us pension / defined benefit issues indicating that the clerk served it on him 156 n.e.3d 932 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6495459-6495459"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6496824-6496824",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6496824",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6496824",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21CA011774 Appellant v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6496824 us erisa / defined contribution issues 21ca011774 appellant v qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6496824-6496824"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6498560-6498560",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6498560",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Barthold",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "197 Cal.App.4th 1573",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6498560 us pension / defined benefit issues 197 cal.app.4th 1573 in re marriage of barthold qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6498560-6498560"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6800535-6800535",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6800535",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LLC v. FI",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6800535 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues llc v. fi qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6800535-6800535"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6800574-6800574",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6800574",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6800574",
      "extracted_docket_number": "356764 Charlevoix Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6800574 us pension / defined benefit issues 356764 charlevoix circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6800574-6800574"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7360844-7360844",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7360844",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 7360844",
      "extracted_docket_number": "106 EDA 2022",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "209 A.3d 367",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7360844 us pension / defined benefit issues 106 eda 2022 209 a.3d 367 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7360844-7360844"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7374904-7374904",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7374904",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re MARRIAGE OF WILLIAM GEORGE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-19-1099 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7374904 us pension / defined benefit issues 2-19-1099 order in re marriage of william george qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7374904-7374904"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7602027-7602027",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7602027",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 7602027",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7602027 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7602027-7602027"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7618020-7618020",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7618020",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR ROBERT STACY HALL APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JOHNSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE JANIE MCKENZIE-WELLS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2021-CA-1054-MR ROBERT STACY HALL APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "833 S.W.2d 825",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7618020 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2021-ca-1054-mr robert stacy hall appellant 833 s.w.2d 825 mr robert stacy hall appellant appeal from johnson circuit court v. honorable janie mckenzie-wells qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7618020-7618020"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7798564-7798564",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7798564",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 7798564",
      "extracted_docket_number": "356764 Charlevoix Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7798564 us pension / defined benefit issues 356764 charlevoix circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7798564-7798564"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7800574-7800574",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7800574",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 7800574",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21CA011807 Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7800574 us pension / defined benefit issues 21ca011807 appellee v qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7800574-7800574"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7801304-7801304",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7801304",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 7801304",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7801304 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7801304-7801304"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7801333-7801333",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7801333",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF RACHAEL KAY SOKOL AND DAVID LANGDON SOKOL Upon the Petition of RACHAEL KAY SOKOL",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21-1918",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "874 N.W.2d 103",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7801333 us pension / defined benefit issues 21-1918 874 n.w.2d 103 in re the marriage of rachael kay sokol and david langdon sokol upon the petition of rachael kay sokol qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7801333-7801333"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7802015-7802015",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7802015",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR CHARLES K. BUCKLEY APPELLANT APPEAL FROM FAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE ERNESTO M. SCORSONE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2021-CA-0040-MR CHARLES K. BUCKLEY APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "391 S.W.3d 377",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7802015 us pension / defined benefit issues 2021-ca-0040-mr charles k. buckley appellant 391 s.w.3d 377 mr charles k. buckley appellant appeal from fayette circuit court v. honorable ernesto m. scorsone qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7802015-7802015"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7806683-7806683",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7806683",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of ELMER and DONNA",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "16 Cal.4th 67",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7806683 us erisa / defined contribution issues 16 cal.4th 67 in re the marriage of elmer and donna qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7806683-7806683"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-814716-814716",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 814716",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "RAJ v. MEMORANDUM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "488 F.3d 1189",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 814716 us pension / defined benefit issues 488 f.3d 1189 raj v. memorandum qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-814716-814716"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8205826-8205826",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8205826",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8205826",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "922 N.E.2d 214",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8205826 us pension / defined benefit issues 922 n.e.2d 214 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8205826-8205826"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8206585-8206585",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8206585",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "STARK COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. ARKOW",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "819 N.E.2d 284",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8206585 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 819 n.e.2d 284 stark county bar association v. arkow qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8206585-8206585"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8207633-8207633",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8207633",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8207633",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "927 F.2d 955",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8207633 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 927 f.2d 955 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8207633-8207633"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8208226-8208226",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8208226",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re MARRIAGE OF TODD KALIS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-21-0434 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8208226 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2-21-0434 order in re marriage of todd kalis qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8208226-8208226"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8208403-8208403",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8208403",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CARRION v. CARRION",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 22-0135 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8208403 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 22-0135 fc domestic relations order carrion v. carrion qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8208403-8208403"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8210737-8210737",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8210737",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8210737",
      "extracted_docket_number": "29308 and 29321 Appellee : : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "86 N.E.3d 937",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8210737 us pension / defined benefit issues 29308 and 29321 appellee : : trial 86 n.e.3d 937 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8210737-8210737"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8210958-8210958",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8210958",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8210958",
      "extracted_docket_number": "L-21-1168 Appellant Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "541 N.E.2d 64",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8210958 us pension / defined benefit issues l-21-1168 appellant trial 541 n.e.2d 64 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8210958-8210958"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8211316-8211316",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8211316",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8211316",
      "extracted_docket_number": "48224 DESIREE LASHAWN HORTON",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8211316 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 48224 desiree lashawn horton domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8211316-8211316"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8211899-8211899",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8211899",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF KELLI ANNE NARDONE AND JOHN WILLIAM NARDONE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21-1419",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "973 N.W.2d 601",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8211899 us pension / defined benefit issues 21-1419 973 n.w.2d 601 in re the marriage of kelli anne nardone and john william nardone qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8211899-8211899"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8211900-8211900",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8211900",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF LORI A. HILL AND MARSHALL R. HILL Upon the Petition of LORI A. HILL",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21-2007",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 N.W.2d 252",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8211900 us pension / defined benefit issues 21-2007 545 n.w.2d 252 in re the marriage of lori a. hill and marshall r. hill upon the petition of lori a. hill qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8211900-8211900"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8212253-8212253",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8212253",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8212253",
      "extracted_docket_number": "110353. During the pendency of the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "432 N.E.2d 183",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8212253 us pension / defined benefit issues 110353. during the pendency of the 432 n.e.2d 183 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8212253-8212253"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8212691-8212691",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8212691",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SEC v. LBRY",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21-20617 tactics that are within the district",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "174 F.3d 599",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8212691 us pension / defined benefit issues 21-20617 tactics that are within the district 174 f.3d 599 sec v. lbry qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8212691-8212691"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8283464-8283464",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8283464",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8283464",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "603 S.W.3d 385",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8283464 us pension / defined benefit issues 603 s.w.3d 385 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8283464-8283464"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8374212-8374212",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8374212",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Knoll and Coyne",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-21-0739 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8374212 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2-21-0739 order in re marriage of knoll and coyne qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8374212-8374212"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8407060-8407060",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8407060",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8407060",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA22-198",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8407060 us erisa / defined contribution issues coa22-198 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8407060-8407060"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8407560-8407560",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8407560",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF KATIE ANN HIATT AND JEREMY SCOTT HIATT Upon the Petition of KATIE ANN HIATT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "22-0758",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "601 N.W.2d 48",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8407560 us erisa / defined contribution issues 22-0758 601 n.w.2d 48 in re the marriage of katie ann hiatt and jeremy scott hiatt upon the petition of katie ann hiatt qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8407560-8407560"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8415699-8415699",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8415699",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "AGUINIGA v. AGUINIGA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 21-0221 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8415699 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 21-0221 fc aguiniga v. aguiniga qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8415699-8415699"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8436221-8436221",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8436221",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Beltran",
      "extracted_docket_number": "S-21-350. 1. Jurisdiction:",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8436221 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues s-21-350. 1. jurisdiction: domestic relations order in re estate of beltran qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8436221-8436221"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-846469-846469",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 846469",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 846469",
      "extracted_docket_number": "253520",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "324 F3d 941",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 846469 us pension / defined benefit issues 253520 324 f3d 941 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-846469-846469"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8482279-8482279",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8482279",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "GAVALDON v. GAVALDON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 22-0302 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8482279 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 22-0302 fc gavaldon v. gavaldon qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8482279-8482279"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8482295-8482295",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8482295",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8482295",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA22-198",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8482295 us erisa / defined contribution issues coa22-198 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8482295-8482295"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8482601-8482601",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8482601",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of CHRISTINA DURAN MORENO",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "212 Cal.App.4th 1565",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8482601 us pension / defined benefit issues 212 cal.app.4th 1565 in re the marriage of christina duran moreno qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8482601-8482601"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8482642-8482642",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8482642",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Belk",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-21-0648 Opinion",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8482642 us pension / defined benefit issues 2-21-0648 opinion in re marriage of belk qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8482642-8482642"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8484526-8484526",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8484526",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF HEATHER ANN BANISTER AND SHAUN IVAN BANISTER Upon the Petition of HEATHER ANN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "22-0221",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8484526 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues 22-0221 domestic relations order in re the marriage of heather ann banister and shaun ivan banister upon the petition of heather ann qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8484526-8484526"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8488106-8488106",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8488106",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of BRILLIANT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "14 Cal.App.4th 1",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8488106 us erisa / defined contribution issues 14 cal.app.4th 1 in re marriage of brilliant qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8488106-8488106"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-852021-852021",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 852021",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 852021",
      "extracted_docket_number": "71S03-1111-DR-644 CLERK of the supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "946 N.E.2d 1191",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 852021 us pension / defined benefit issues 71s03-1111-dr-644 clerk of the supreme 946 n.e.2d 1191 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-852021-852021"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-857641-857641",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 857641",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 857641",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "632 F.3d 837",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 857641 us pension / defined benefit issues 632 f.3d 837 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-857641-857641"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-859467-859467",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 859467",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "JR. v. D'ANNE P. MCFARLAND DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 859467 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order jr. v. d'anne p. mcfarland date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-859467-859467"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8595772-8595772",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8595772",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8595772",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8595772 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8595772-8595772"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8598884-8598884",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8598884",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8598884",
      "extracted_docket_number": "29524 : v. : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8598884 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 29524 : v. : trial domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8598884-8598884"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-865833-865833",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 865833",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "R.K. v. J.K",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "580 F.3d 1234",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 865833 us pension / defined benefit issues 580 f.3d 1234 r.k. v. j.k qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-865833-865833"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-868100-868100",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 868100",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "FILED v. MAY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 868100 us pension / defined benefit issues filed v. may qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-868100-868100"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-871547-871547",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 871547",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 871547",
      "extracted_docket_number": "SCWC-29340 CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "205 P.3d 548",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 871547 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues scwc-29340 certiorari to the intermediate 205 p.3d 548 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-871547-871547"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-873579-873579",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 873579",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "EVELYN STEPHENS v. OPM",
      "extracted_docket_number": "PH-0831-12-0106-I-1",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 873579 us pension / defined benefit issues ph-0831-12-0106-i-1 evelyn stephens v. opm qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-873579-873579"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-874263-874263",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 874263",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hunt",
      "extracted_docket_number": "35751 DEBRA A. BORLEY",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "219 P.3d 448",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 874263 us pension / defined benefit issues 35751 debra a. borley 219 p.3d 448 in re marriage of hunt qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-874263-874263"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-883030-883030",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 883030",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MARGARET H. BOHARSKI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "92-055",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 883030 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 92-055 domestic relations order in re the marriage of margaret h. boharski qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-883030-883030"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-885737-885737",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 885737",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of BETH LAUREN MORGENSTERN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "00-605",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "893 P.2d 860",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 885737 us pension / defined benefit issues 00-605 893 p.2d 860 in re the marriage of beth lauren morgenstern qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-885737-885737"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-888365-888365",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 888365",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Carter",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "107 P.3d 488",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 888365 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 107 p.3d 488 in re marriage of carter qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-888365-888365"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-888501-888501",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 888501",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF TED GREGORY McNEA",
      "extracted_docket_number": "and result in this",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "95 P.3d 694",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 888501 us pension / defined benefit issues and result in this 95 p.3d 694 in re the marriage of ted gregory mcnea qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-888501-888501"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-892494-892494",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 892494",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Adams",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years Husband participated",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "739 P.2d 974",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 892494 us pension / defined benefit issues of years husband participated 739 p.2d 974 in re marriage of adams qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-892494-892494"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-892525-892525",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 892525",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Lehman",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months of marriage and participating",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 892525 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues of months of marriage and participating domestic relations order in re marriage of lehman qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-892525-892525"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-894014-894014",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 894014",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 894014",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "216 P.3d 804",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 894014 us pension / defined benefit issues 216 p.3d 804 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-894014-894014"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-894068-894068",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 894068",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 894068",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "860 P.2d 182",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 894068 us pension / defined benefit issues 860 p.2d 182 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-894068-894068"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-896843-896843",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 896843",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 896843",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20000298",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "585 N.W.2d 561",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 896843 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20000298 585 n.w.2d 561 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-896843-896843"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-897014-897014",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 897014",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 897014",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20010186",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "626 N.W.2d 690",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 897014 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20010186 626 n.w.2d 690 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-897014-897014"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-897138-897138",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 897138",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 897138",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20020168",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "561 N.W.2d 644",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 897138 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20020168 561 n.w.2d 644 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-897138-897138"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-897405-897405",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 897405",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 897405",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20030278",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "653 N.W.2d 663",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 897405 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20030278 653 n.w.2d 663 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-897405-897405"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-897893-897893",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 897893",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 897893",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20050328",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "688 N.W.2d 402",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 897893 us erisa / defined contribution issues 20050328 688 n.w.2d 402 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-897893-897893"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-898536-898536",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 898536",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 898536",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20080174",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "747 N.W.2d 85",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 898536 us erisa / defined contribution issues 20080174 747 n.w.2d 85 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-898536-898536"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-898957-898957",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 898957",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 898957",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20100053",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "676 N.W.2d 794",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 898957 us pension / defined benefit issues 20100053 676 n.w.2d 794 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-898957-898957"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-901472-901472",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 901472",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 901472",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "132 F3d 1225",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 901472 us pension / defined benefit issues 132 f3d 1225 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-901472-901472"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9247543-9247543",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9247543",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of HOLLY HERBERS and TODD ERIK FERRARI. HOLLY HERBERS FERRARI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "and obtain a",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9247543 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues and obtain a domestic relations order in re marriage of holly herbers and todd erik ferrari. holly herbers ferrari qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9247543-9247543"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9297204-9297204",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9297204",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ANGELA MARIE HEISIG v. ANDREW CARL HEISIG",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9297204 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order angela marie heisig v. andrew carl heisig qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9297204-9297204"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-931420-931420",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 931420",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 931420",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 931420 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-931420-931420"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-931421-931421",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 931421",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 931421",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 931421 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-931421-931421"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-931622-931622",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 931622",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 931622",
      "extracted_docket_number": "27665-10S",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 931622 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 27665-10s domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-931622-931622"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9323116-9323116",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9323116",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9323116",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9323116 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9323116-9323116"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9323915-9323915",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9323915",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SCOTT v. SCOTT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 22-0155 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9323915 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 22-0155 fc scott v. scott qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9323915-9323915"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9325097-9325097",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9325097",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Shulga",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-21-1018 where the circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9325097 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1-21-1018 where the circuit domestic relations order in re marriage of shulga qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9325097-9325097"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9348563-9348563",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9348563",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9348563",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA22-198",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9348563 us erisa / defined contribution issues coa22-198 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9348563-9348563"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9349948-9349948",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9349948",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Lobaina",
      "extracted_docket_number": "358184 Macomb Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9349948 us erisa / defined contribution issues 358184 macomb circuit in re estate of lobaina qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9349948-9349948"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9350649-9350649",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9350649",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "C.S. v. M.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2021 CA 00155 7 AS THE TRIAL",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "969 N.E.2d 312",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9350649 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2021 ca 00155 7 as the trial 969 n.e.2d 312 c.s. v. m.s qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9350649-9350649"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9351016-9351016",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9351016",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9351016",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9351016 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9351016-9351016"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9351665-9351665",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9351665",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Santopadre",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9351665 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of santopadre qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9351665-9351665"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9351914-9351914",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9351914",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9351914",
      "extracted_docket_number": "05-22-00056-CV V. Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "118 S.W.3d 82",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9351914 us pension / defined benefit issues 05-22-00056-cv v. trial 118 s.w.3d 82 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9351914-9351914"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9352066-9352066",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9352066",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of DARRELL P",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "68 Cal.App.3d 515",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9352066 us pension / defined benefit issues 68 cal.app.3d 515 in re marriage of darrell p qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9352066-9352066"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9353342-9353342",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9353342",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MATTHEW CALVIN HARPER AND STEPHANIE MAE HARPER Upon the Petition of MATTHEW",
      "extracted_docket_number": "22-0041",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9353342 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues 22-0041 domestic relations order in re the marriage of matthew calvin harper and stephanie mae harper upon the petition of matthew qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9353342-9353342"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9353939-9353939",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9353939",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9353939",
      "extracted_docket_number": "359226 Livingston Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9353939 us erisa / defined contribution issues 359226 livingston circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9353939-9353939"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9363824-9363824",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9363824",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of PATRICIA M. and JOHN D",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "16 Cal.4th 67",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9363824 us pension / defined benefit issues 16 cal.4th 67 in re the marriage of patricia m. and john d qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9363824-9363824"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9365514-9365514",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9365514",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LESLIE v. LESLIE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 22-0199 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9365514 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1 ca-cv 22-0199 fc leslie v. leslie qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9365514-9365514"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9365932-9365932",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9365932",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MATTHEW CALVIN HARPER AND STEPHANIE MAE HARPER Upon the Petition of MATTHEW",
      "extracted_docket_number": "22-0041",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9365932 domestic relations order us erisa / defined contribution issues 22-0041 domestic relations order in re the marriage of matthew calvin harper and stephanie mae harper upon the petition of matthew qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9365932-9365932"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9366373-9366373",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9366373",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "D.H. v. J.C",
      "extracted_docket_number": "110353. During the pendency of the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "432 N.E.2d 183",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9366373 us pension / defined benefit issues 110353. during the pendency of the 432 n.e.2d 183 d.h. v. j.c qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9366373-9366373"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9366529-9366529",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9366529",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of CLIFFORD and",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "33 Cal.App.5th 298",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9366529 us pension / defined benefit issues 33 cal.app.5th 298 in re the marriage of clifford and qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9366529-9366529"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9367425-9367425",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9367425",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ORDER CERTIFYING OPINION FOR v. PUBLICATION ANGELA M. BELTHIUS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "68 Cal.App.3d 515",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9367425 us pension / defined benefit issues 68 cal.app.3d 515 order certifying opinion for v. publication angela m. belthius qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9367425-9367425"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9368787-9368787",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9368787",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of LAURIE and WAYNE JACOBSEN. LAURIE JACOBSEN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "18 Cal.4th 169",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9368787 us pension / defined benefit issues 18 cal.4th 169 in re marriage of laurie and wayne jacobsen. laurie jacobsen qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9368787-9368787"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9369353-9369353",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9369353",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF SUE A. BLOOMQUIST AND ROBERT L. BLOOMQUIST Upon the Petition of SUE A. BLOOMQUIST",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21-1631",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9369353 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 21-1631 domestic relations order in re the marriage of sue a. bloomquist and robert l. bloomquist upon the petition of sue a. bloomquist qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9369353-9369353"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9370683-9370683",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9370683",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "WARREN v. STEPHENS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 22-0337 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "676 F.3d 1193",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9370683 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 22-0337 fc 676 f.3d 1193 warren v. stephens qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9370683-9370683"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9371474-9371474",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9371474",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "TOMSICH v. TOMSICH",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 22-0314 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9371474 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 22-0314 fc tomsich v. tomsich qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9371474-9371474"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9371915-9371915",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9371915",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9371915",
      "extracted_docket_number": "359437 Genesee Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9371915 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 359437 genesee circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9371915-9371915"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9372779-9372779",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9372779",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9372779",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of months of marriage included",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "578 F.3d 1337",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9372779 us pension / defined benefit issues of months of marriage included 578 f.3d 1337 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9372779-9372779"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9373588-9373588",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9373588",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9373588",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER Appellant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "48 F.3d 1237",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9373588 us pension / defined benefit issues number appellant 48 f.3d 1237 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9373588-9373588"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9373706-9373706",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9373706",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9373706",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER MARSHALL",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "578 F. App'x 973",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9373706 us pension / defined benefit issues number marshall 578 f. app'x 973 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9373706-9373706"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9376981-9376981",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9376981",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re MARRIAGE OF LILLIAN R. KRILICH",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9376981 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of lillian r. krilich qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9376981-9376981"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9377978-9377978",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9377978",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "WARNER v. DRIGGS-WARNER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 21-0732 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "943 F.2d 1048",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9377978 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 21-0732 fc 943 f.2d 1048 warner v. driggs-warner qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9377978-9377978"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9378518-9378518",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9378518",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9378518",
      "extracted_docket_number": "WD-22-002 nka Margaret A. Korfhage Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "197 N.E.3d 1014",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9378518 us pension / defined benefit issues wd-22-002 nka margaret a. korfhage trial 197 n.e.3d 1014 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9378518-9378518"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9378579-9378579",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9378579",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "L.L.C. v. MSMC",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-22-0530 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9378579 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1-22-0530 order l.l.c. v. msmc qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9378579-9378579"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9378758-9378758",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9378758",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9378758",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "176 P.3d 645",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9378758 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 176 p.3d 645 qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9378758-9378758"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9381606-9381606",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9381606",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9381606",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9381606 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9381606-9381606"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9383516-9383516",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9383516",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9383516",
      "extracted_docket_number": "806 WDA 2022",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "231 A.3d 928",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9383516 us pension / defined benefit issues 806 wda 2022 231 a.3d 928 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9383516-9383516"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9387995-9387995",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9387995",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9387995",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9387995 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9387995-9387995"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9388732-9388732",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9388732",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9388732",
      "extracted_docket_number": "that each party accepted. As the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "351 N.E.2d 113",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9388732 us pension / defined benefit issues that each party accepted. as the trial 351 n.e.2d 113 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9388732-9388732"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9389175-9389175",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9389175",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9389175",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of bases upon which the family",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9389175 us pension / defined benefit issues of bases upon which the family qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9389175-9389175"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9391406-9391406",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9391406",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9391406",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA22-448",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9391406 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues coa22-448 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9391406-9391406"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9392535-9392535",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9392535",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Jones",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9392535 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order in re marriage of jones qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9392535-9392535"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9393313-9393313",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9393313",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Schneider",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4-22-0770 Carla Bender not precedent except",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "824 N.E.2d 177",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9393313 us pension / defined benefit issues 4-22-0770 carla bender not precedent except 824 n.e.2d 177 in re marriage of schneider qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9393313-9393313"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9394100-9394100",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9394100",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR SHANNON RAY FERGUSON APPELLANT APPEAL FROM KNOX CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE MARCUS L. VANOVER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2021-CA-1442-MR SHANNON RAY FERGUSON APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "634 S.W.3d 589",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9394100 us pension / defined benefit issues 2021-ca-1442-mr shannon ray ferguson appellant 634 s.w.3d 589 mr shannon ray ferguson appellant appeal from knox circuit court v. honorable marcus l. vanover qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9394100-9394100"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9396619-9396619",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9396619",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9396619",
      "extracted_docket_number": "0314-22-4 GLENN DANCE FROM THE CIRCUIT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9396619 us pension / defined benefit issues 0314-22-4 glenn dance from the circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9396619-9396619"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9396624-9396624",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9396624",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9396624",
      "extracted_docket_number": "0314-22-4 GLENN DANCE FROM THE CIRCUIT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9396624 us pension / defined benefit issues 0314-22-4 glenn dance from the circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9396624-9396624"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9398343-9398343",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9398343",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9398343",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "922 N.E.2d 214",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9398343 us erisa / defined contribution issues 922 n.e.2d 214 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9398343-9398343"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9402928-9402928",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9402928",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9402928",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "154 S.W.3d 93",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9402928 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 154 s.w.3d 93 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9402928-9402928"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9403130-9403130",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9403130",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CASWELL v. CASWELL",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 22-0430 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9403130 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 22-0430 fc domestic relations order caswell v. caswell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9403130-9403130"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9407350-9407350",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9407350",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SPELTZ v. SPELTZ",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 22-0593 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9407350 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1 ca-cv 22-0593 fc speltz v. speltz qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9407350-9407350"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9407392-9407392",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9407392",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of DAVID and",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "16 Cal.4th 67",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9407392 us pension / defined benefit issues 16 cal.4th 67 in re the marriage of david and qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9407392-9407392"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9411887-9411887",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9411887",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR SHERYL ANN KOSITZKY APPELLANT APPEALS FROM BARREN FAMILY COURT v. HONORABLE MICA WOOD PENCE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2022-CA-0355-MR SHERYL ANN KOSITZKY APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "110 S.W.3d 336",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9411887 us pension / defined benefit issues 2022-ca-0355-mr sheryl ann kositzky appellant 110 s.w.3d 336 mr sheryl ann kositzky appellant appeals from barren family court v. honorable mica wood pence qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9411887-9411887"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9412697-9412697",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9412697",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9412697",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9412697 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9412697-9412697"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9412769-9412769",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9412769",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "PALADINO v. MACGURN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 22-0513 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9412769 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 22-0513 fc domestic relations order paladino v. macgurn qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9412769-9412769"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9412804-9412804",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9412804",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9412804",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1604 MDA 2022",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "221 A.3d 192",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9412804 us pension / defined benefit issues 1604 mda 2022 221 a.3d 192 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9412804-9412804"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9449263-9449263",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9449263",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9449263",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "966 N.W.2d 45",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9449263 us pension / defined benefit issues 966 n.w.2d 45 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9449263-9449263"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9554593-9554593",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9554593",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF KARLA J. UNKE AND WESLEY B. UNKE Upon the Petition of KARLA J. UNKE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "22-1089",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "966 N.W.2d 630",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9554593 us pension / defined benefit issues 22-1089 966 n.w.2d 630 in re the marriage of karla j. unke and wesley b. unke upon the petition of karla j. unke qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9554593-9554593"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9554626-9554626",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9554626",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Cassidy",
      "extracted_docket_number": "312 MDA 2022 Appellant :",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "231 A.3d 928",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9554626 us pension / defined benefit issues 312 mda 2022 appellant : 231 a.3d 928 in re estate of cassidy qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9554626-9554626"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9556229-9556229",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9556229",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "M.E.V. v. R.D.V",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3116 EDA 2022 v. : : : STEPHANIE H. WINEGRAD : : :",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "260 A.3d 256",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9556229 us erisa / defined contribution issues 3116 eda 2022 v. : : : stephanie h. winegrad : : : 260 a.3d 256 m.e.v. v. r.d.v qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9556229-9556229"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9637458-9637458",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9637458",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9637458",
      "extracted_docket_number": "48705 JUDY KATSEANES",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "246 P.3d 958",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9637458 us erisa / defined contribution issues 48705 judy katseanes 246 p.3d 958 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9637458-9637458"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9693903-9693903",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9693903",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR MICHAEL TODD KEENE APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON FAMILY COURT v. HONORABLE DERWIN L. WEBB",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2021-CA-1493-MR MICHAEL TODD KEENE APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "110 S.W.3d 336",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9693903 us pension / defined benefit issues 2021-ca-1493-mr michael todd keene appellant 110 s.w.3d 336 mr michael todd keene appellant appeal from jefferson family court v. honorable derwin l. webb qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9693903-9693903"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9838569-9838569",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9838569",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re MARRIAGE OF PERLA OTERO",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-21-1452 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9838569 us pension / defined benefit issues 1-21-1452 order in re marriage of perla otero qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9838569-9838569"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9839590-9839590",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9839590",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF TODD ALLEX McCREEDY AND THERESA RENE McCREEDY Upon the Petition of TODD ALLEX",
      "extracted_docket_number": "22-0657",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "476 N.W.2d 324",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9839590 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 22-0657 476 n.w.2d 324 in re the marriage of todd allex mccreedy and theresa rene mccreedy upon the petition of todd allex qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9839590-9839590"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9840173-9840173",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9840173",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9840173",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of shares",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9840173 us pension / defined benefit issues of shares qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9840173-9840173"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9881491-9881491",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9881491",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Heroy",
      "extracted_docket_number": "4-23-0119 Carla Bender not precedent except",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "89 N.E.3d 296",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9881491 us pension / defined benefit issues 4-23-0119 carla bender not precedent except 89 n.e.3d 296 in re marriage of heroy qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9881491-9881491"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9881645-9881645",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9881645",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "WALKER v. WALKER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 23-0036 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9881645 us pension / defined benefit issues 1 ca-cv 23-0036 fc walker v. walker qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9881645-9881645"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9882876-9882876",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9882876",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9882876",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "450 N.E.2d 1140",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9882876 us pension / defined benefit issues 450 n.e.2d 1140 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9882876-9882876"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9889252-9889252",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9889252",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "F.D.I.C. v. F & A",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "660 S.W.3d 98",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9889252 us pension / defined benefit issues 660 s.w.3d 98 f.d.i.c. v. f & a qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9889252-9889252"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9892079-9892079",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9892079",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR MICHAEL DWAYNE GREGORY APPELLANT APPEAL FROM WHITLEY CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE PAUL K. WINCHESTER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2022-CA-1522-MR MICHAEL DWAYNE GREGORY APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "295 S.W.3d 850",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9892079 us pension / defined benefit issues 2022-ca-1522-mr michael dwayne gregory appellant 295 s.w.3d 850 mr michael dwayne gregory appellant appeal from whitley circuit court v. honorable paul k. winchester qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9892079-9892079"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9892101-9892101",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9892101",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Frisz",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-23-0505 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9892101 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1-23-0505 order in re marriage of frisz qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9892101-9892101"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9894541-9894541",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9894541",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9894541",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9894541 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension military_retirement public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9894541-9894541"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9897426-9897426",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9897426",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "R.W. v. M.D",
      "extracted_docket_number": "22A-DN-1202 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "44 N.E.3d 721",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9897426 us pension / defined benefit issues 22a-dn-1202 v 44 n.e.3d 721 r.w. v. m.d qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9897426-9897426"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9898149-9898149",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9898149",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Bulicek",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "800 P.2d 394",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9898149 us pension / defined benefit issues 800 p.2d 394 in re marriage of bulicek qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9898149-9898149"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9898529-9898529",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9898529",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Matter of Estate of Hein",
      "extracted_docket_number": "57492-6-II There is no record of any other filings",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "485 P.3d 953",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9898529 us pension / defined benefit issues 57492-6-ii there is no record of any other filings 485 p.3d 953 in re matter of estate of hein qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9898529-9898529"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9898829-9898829",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9898829",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9898829",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "640 S.W.3d 408",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9898829 us erisa / defined contribution issues 640 s.w.3d 408 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9898829-9898829"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9900831-9900831",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9900831",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9900831",
      "extracted_docket_number": "and that we would treat",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9900831 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues and that we would treat domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9900831-9900831"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9901551-9901551",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9901551",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Kesler",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "427 P.3d 77",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9901551 us erisa / defined contribution issues 427 p.3d 77 in re marriage of kesler qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9901551-9901551"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9903699-9903699",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9903699",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9903699",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9903699 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9903699-9903699"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9904422-9904422",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9904422",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9904422",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9904422 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9904422-9904422"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9905763-9905763",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9905763",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "COLUMBUS BAR ASSOCIATION v. BULSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9905763 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order columbus bar association v. bulson qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9905763-9905763"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9910793-9910793",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9910793",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "I.R. v. D.R",
      "extracted_docket_number": "22AP0020 Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9910793 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 22ap0020 appellee v i.r. v. d.r qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9910793-9910793"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9912164-9912164",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9912164",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Litzky",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "335 N.E.2d 708",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9912164 us erisa / defined contribution issues 335 n.e.2d 708 in re estate of litzky qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9912164-9912164"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9914192-9914192",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9914192",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Goldsmith",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-22-0510 NOTICE: This order was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9914192 us pension / defined benefit issues 1-22-0510 notice: this order was in re marriage of goldsmith qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9914192-9914192"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9918441-9918441",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9918441",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9918441",
      "extracted_docket_number": "OT-23-013 Appellee Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "205 N.E.3d 1203",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9918441 us pension / defined benefit issues ot-23-013 appellee trial 205 n.e.3d 1203 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9918441-9918441"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9925758-9925758",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9925758",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hunter",
      "extracted_docket_number": "84708-2-I/21 III Kathy next asserts that the superior",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "295 P.3d 736",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9925758 us erisa / defined contribution issues 84708-2-i/21 iii kathy next asserts that the superior 295 p.3d 736 in re marriage of hunter qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9925758-9925758"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9926325-9926325",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9926325",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9926325",
      "extracted_docket_number": "23CA011939 Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9926325 us pension / defined benefit issues 23ca011939 appellee v qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9926325-9926325"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9926843-9926843",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9926843",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of CANDY and TERENCE BONNER",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "35 Cal.4th 15",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9926843 us pension / defined benefit issues 35 cal.4th 15 in re the marriage of candy and terence bonner qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9926843-9926843"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9927846-9927846",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9927846",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9927846",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "979 N.W.2d 867",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9927846 us pension / defined benefit issues 979 n.w.2d 867 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9927846-9927846"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9928185-9928185",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9928185",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "BETH E. ANKETELL v. MARTIN KULLDORFF",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "263 A.3d 972",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9928185 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 263 a.3d 972 beth e. anketell v. martin kulldorff qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9928185-9928185"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9928362-9928362",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9928362",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9928362",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "550 U.S. 544",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9928362 us pension / defined benefit issues 550 u.s. 544 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9928362-9928362"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9931428-9931428",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9931428",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9931428",
      "extracted_docket_number": "twenty-two. 6",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9931428 us pension / defined benefit issues twenty-two. 6 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9931428-9931428"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9940102-9940102",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9940102",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "S.M.C. v. W.P.C",
      "extracted_docket_number": "44 WDA 2023",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9940102 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 44 wda 2023 domestic relations order s.m.c. v. w.p.c qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9940102-9940102"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9941228-9941228",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9941228",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9941228",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "199 S.W.3d 279",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9941228 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 199 s.w.3d 279 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9941228-9941228"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9941296-9941296",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9941296",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR LOYD JEFFREY BOWERS APPELLANT APPEAL FROM CAMPBELL CIRCUIT COURT v. FAMILY DIVISION HONORABLE RICHARD A. WOESTE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2023-CA-0102-MR LOYD JEFFREY BOWERS APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "235 S.W.3d 1",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9941296 us erisa / defined contribution issues 2023-ca-0102-mr loyd jeffrey bowers appellant 235 s.w.3d 1 mr loyd jeffrey bowers appellant appeal from campbell circuit court v. family division honorable richard a. woeste qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9941296-9941296"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9943195-9943195",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9943195",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Kehoe and Farkas",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-23-0941 NOTICE: This order was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9943195 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1-23-0941 notice: this order was in re marriage of kehoe and farkas qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9943195-9943195"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9946288-9946288",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9946288",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "VAN CAMP v. VAN CAMP",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 CA-CV 23-0297 FC",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "537 P.3d 807",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9946288 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1 ca-cv 23-0297 fc 537 p.3d 807 van camp v. van camp qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9946288-9946288"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9948775-9948775",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9948775",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "C.L.A. v. D.P.M",
      "extracted_docket_number": "reflects service of his motions was perfected on Wi",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9948775 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues reflects service of his motions was perfected on wi domestic relations order c.l.a. v. d.p.m qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9948775-9948775"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9949740-9949740",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9949740",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9949740",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "204 A.3d 1102",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9949740 us pension / defined benefit issues 204 a.3d 1102 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9949740-9949740"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9952811-9952811",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9952811",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "S.D. v. G.D",
      "extracted_docket_number": "23S-DN-245",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9952811 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 23s-dn-245 domestic relations order s.d. v. g.d qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9952811-9952811"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9955748-9955748",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9955748",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR SOUMAYA JABRAZKO APPELLANT APPEAL FROM KENTON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE TERRI KING SCHOBORG",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2023-CA-0336-MR SOUMAYA JABRAZKO APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "245 S.W.3d 222",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9955748 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2023-ca-0336-mr soumaya jabrazko appellant 245 s.w.3d 222 mr soumaya jabrazko appellant appeal from kenton circuit court v. honorable terri king schoborg qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9955748-9955748"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9956538-9956538",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9956538",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Matter of Marriage of Denning & Stokes",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entries",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9956538 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues entries domestic relations order in re matter of marriage of denning & stokes qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9956538-9956538"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9956539-9956539",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9956539",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9956539",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9956539 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9956539-9956539"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9957418-9957418",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9957418",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9957418",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2 is sustained. This case is remanded to the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "541 N.E.2d 1028",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9957418 us pension / defined benefit issues 2 is sustained. this case is remanded to the trial 541 n.e.2d 1028 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9957418-9957418"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9958276-9958276",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9958276",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9958276",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2023 AP 03 0021 8 trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "136 N.E.3d 966",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9958276 us pension / defined benefit issues 2023 ap 03 0021 8 trial 136 n.e.3d 966 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9958276-9958276"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9958396-9958396",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9958396",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9958396",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2023 AP 03 0021 8 trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "136 N.E.3d 966",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9958396 us pension / defined benefit issues 2023 ap 03 0021 8 trial 136 n.e.3d 966 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9958396-9958396"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9958638-9958638",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9958638",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9958638",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "937 S.W.2d 823",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9958638 us pension / defined benefit issues 937 s.w.2d 823 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9958638-9958638"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9961630-9961630",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9961630",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR JOSEPH DAVID WILLETT APPELLANT APPEAL FROM UNION FAMILY COURT v. HONORABLE BRANDI H. ROGERS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2023-CA-0490-MR JOSEPH DAVID WILLETT APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "218 S.W.3d 395",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9961630 us pension / defined benefit issues 2023-ca-0490-mr joseph david willett appellant 218 s.w.3d 395 mr joseph david willett appellant appeal from union family court v. honorable brandi h. rogers qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9961630-9961630"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9962027-9962027",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9962027",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9962027",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER Appellant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "219 F.3d 1332",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9962027 us pension / defined benefit issues number appellant 219 f.3d 1332 qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9962027-9962027"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9962149-9962149",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9962149",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9962149",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9962149 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9962149-9962149"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9962162-9962162",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9962162",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9962162",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9962162 us erisa / defined contribution issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9962162-9962162"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9962341-9962341",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9962341",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "L.L.C. v. NCP",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9962341 us pension / defined benefit issues l.l.c. v. ncp qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9962341-9962341"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9962442-9962442",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9962442",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9962442",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER Appellant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9962442 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues number appellant domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9962442-9962442"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9963458-9963458",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9963458",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9963458",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 and incorporated by reference",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "541 N.E.2d 1028",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9963458 us erisa / defined contribution issues 1 and incorporated by reference 541 n.e.2d 1028 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9963458-9963458"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9965326-9965326",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9965326",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9965326",
      "extracted_docket_number": "equalization efforts. Tex. Gov",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "379 S.W.3d 267",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9965326 us pension / defined benefit issues equalization efforts. tex. gov 379 s.w.3d 267 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9965326-9965326"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9965580-9965580",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9965580",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Breslow",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-24-0143 NOTICE: This order was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9965580 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1-24-0143 notice: this order was domestic relations order in re marriage of breslow qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9965580-9965580"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9972526-9972526",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9972526",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9972526",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9972526 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9972526-9972526"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9972694-9972694",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9972694",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Figliulo",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1-23-1161 NOTICE: This order was",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9972694 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues 1-23-1161 notice: this order was domestic relations order in re marriage of figliulo qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9972694-9972694"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9972944-9972944",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9972944",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF LONNIE DALE NYE AND HEATHER MARIE NYE Upon the Petition of LONNIE DALE NYE",
      "extracted_docket_number": "23-0350",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "966 N.W.2d 630",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9972944 us pension / defined benefit issues 23-0350 966 n.w.2d 630 in re the marriage of lonnie dale nye and heather marie nye upon the petition of lonnie dale nye qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9972944-9972944"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9974309-9974309",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9974309",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9974309",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "783 N.E.2d 623",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9974309 us pension / defined benefit issues 783 n.e.2d 623 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9974309-9974309"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9975141-9975141",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9975141",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9975141",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9975141 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9975141-9975141"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9975580-9975580",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9975580",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "S.R. v. S.R",
      "extracted_docket_number": "shows that Melvin filed 11 motions for continuance",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "541 N.E.2d 1028",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9975580 us pension / defined benefit issues shows that melvin filed 11 motions for continuance 541 n.e.2d 1028 s.r. v. s.r qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9975580-9975580"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9975711-9975711",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9975711",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of KENNETH JAMES PHIPPS and JEAN AMBER PHIPPS. KENNETH JAMES PHIPPS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "234 F.3d 415",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9975711 us pension / defined benefit issues 234 f.3d 415 in re the marriage of kenneth james phipps and jean amber phipps. kenneth james phipps qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9975711-9975711"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9978147-9978147",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9978147",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9978147",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9978147 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9978147-9978147"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9978599-9978599",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9978599",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9978599",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9978599 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension present_value preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9978599-9978599"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9980489-9980489",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9980489",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9980489",
      "extracted_docket_number": "L-23-1091 Appellee Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "376 U.S. 575",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9980489 us pension / defined benefit issues l-23-1091 appellee trial 376 u.s. 575 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9980489-9980489"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9983388-9983388",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9983388",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9983388",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "477 U.S. 317",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9983388 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 477 u.s. 317 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9983388-9983388"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9988343-9988343",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9988343",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9988343",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9988343 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9988343-9988343"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9993775-9993775",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9993775",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9993775",
      "extracted_docket_number": "33 is the ConocoPhillips Defendants",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "141 S.Ct. 474",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9993775 us pension / defined benefit issues 33 is the conocophillips defendants 141 s.ct. 474 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9993775-9993775"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9993904-9993904",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9993904",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9993904",
      "extracted_docket_number": "57 is Plaintiff Monte Mabry",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "226 F.3d 1042",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9993904 us pension / defined benefit issues 57 is plaintiff monte mabry 226 f.3d 1042 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9993904-9993904"
    },
    {
      "slug": "crystal-nami-chi-v-chang-vum-chi-3364183",
      "title": "Crystal Nami Chi v. Chang Vum Chi",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Crystal Nami Chi v. Chang Vum Chi",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3368643/nami-chi-v-vum-chi-no-31-29-70-apr-18-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3368643",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-04-18",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "crystal nami chi v. chang vum chi us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3368643 crystal nami chi v. chang vum chi qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/crystal-nami-chi-v-chang-vum-chi-3364183"
    },
    {
      "slug": "daniel-breton-v-lyn-m-breton-3353429",
      "title": "Daniel Breton v. Lyn M. Breton.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Daniel Breton v. Lyn M. Breton.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3357898/breton-v-breton-no-0123533-sep-6-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3357898",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-09-06",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "daniel breton v. lyn m. breton. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3357898 daniel breton v. lyn m. breton. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/daniel-breton-v-lyn-m-breton-3353429"
    },
    {
      "slug": "daniel-pasqualini-v-regina-pasqualini-3366239",
      "title": "Daniel Pasqualini v. Regina Pasqualini",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Daniel Pasqualini v. Regina Pasqualini",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3370699/pasqualini-v-pasqualini-no-fa96-05-58-42-feb-9-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3370699",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-02-09",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "daniel pasqualini v. regina pasqualini us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3370699 daniel pasqualini v. regina pasqualini qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/daniel-pasqualini-v-regina-pasqualini-3366239"
    },
    {
      "slug": "daria-duglenski-v-peter-duglenski-3362962",
      "title": "Daria Duglenski v. Peter Duglenski",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Daria Duglenski v. Peter Duglenski",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3367423/duglenski-v-duglenski-no-fa98-0415601-jun-10-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3367423",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-06-10",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "daria duglenski v. peter duglenski us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3367423 daria duglenski v. peter duglenski qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/daria-duglenski-v-peter-duglenski-3362962"
    },
    {
      "slug": "david-derisi-v-sheila-t-derisi-3331354",
      "title": "David Derisi v. Sheila T. Derisi.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "David Derisi v. Sheila T. Derisi.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3335850/derisi-v-derisi-no-fa-99-0429028s-may-26-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3335850",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-05-26",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "david derisi v. sheila t. derisi. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3335850 david derisi v. sheila t. derisi. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/david-derisi-v-sheila-t-derisi-3331354"
    },
    {
      "slug": "david-glover-v-jean-glover-3343722",
      "title": "David Glover v. Jean Glover",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "David Glover v. Jean Glover",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3348205/glover-v-glover-no-0540221-jun-16-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3348205",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-06-16",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "david glover v. jean glover us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3348205 david glover v. jean glover qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/david-glover-v-jean-glover-3343722"
    },
    {
      "slug": "david-r-allen-v-sonia-s-allen-3353511",
      "title": "David R. Allen v. Sonia S. Allen",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "David R. Allen v. Sonia S. Allen",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3357979/allen-v-allen-no-fa-98-0087023-s-jul-28-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3357979",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-07-28",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "david r. allen v. sonia s. allen us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3357979 david r. allen v. sonia s. allen qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/david-r-allen-v-sonia-s-allen-3353511"
    },
    {
      "slug": "david-russell-gunn-v-mary-ann-gunn-3330413",
      "title": "David Russell Gunn v. Mary Ann Gunn",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "David Russell Gunn v. Mary Ann Gunn",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3334909/gunn-v-gunn-no-fa-96-0391530-s-may-14-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3334909",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-05-14",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "david russell gunn v. mary ann gunn us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3334909 david russell gunn v. mary ann gunn qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/david-russell-gunn-v-mary-ann-gunn-3330413"
    },
    {
      "slug": "dawn-b-gonzales-v-cirilo-gonzalez-3334912",
      "title": "Dawn B. Gonzales v. Cirilo Gonzalez",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Dawn B. Gonzales v. Cirilo Gonzalez",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3339403/gonzales-v-gonzalez-no-fa-99-035-96-16-jul-28-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3339403",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-07-28",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "dawn b. gonzales v. cirilo gonzalez us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3339403 dawn b. gonzales v. cirilo gonzalez qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/dawn-b-gonzales-v-cirilo-gonzalez-3334912"
    },
    {
      "slug": "deborah-elliott-v-john-elliott-3364546",
      "title": "Deborah Elliott v. John Elliott",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Deborah Elliott v. John Elliott",
      "extracted_docket_number": "established that the interests of justice were not",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3369006/elliott-v-elliott-no-fa-98-0415733-s-nov-24-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3369006",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-11-24",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "deborah elliott v. john elliott us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3369006 established that the interests of justice were not deborah elliott v. john elliott qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/deborah-elliott-v-john-elliott-3364546"
    },
    {
      "slug": "deborah-narowski-v-gregory-narowski-ct-page-6261-3370161",
      "title": "Deborah Narowski v. Gregory Narowski. Ct Page 6261",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Deborah Narowski v. Gregory Narowski. Ct Page 6261",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3374618/narowski-v-narowski-no-fa00-0071932s-may-17-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3374618",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-05-17",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "deborah narowski v. gregory narowski. ct page 6261 us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3374618 deborah narowski v. gregory narowski. ct page 6261 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/deborah-narowski-v-gregory-narowski-ct-page-6261-3370161"
    },
    {
      "slug": "deborah-s-renals-v-john-j-renals-jr-3355284",
      "title": "Deborah S. Renals v. John J. Renals, Jr.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Deborah S. Renals v. John J. Renals, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3359752/renals-v-renals-no-fa-98-67847-apr-6-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3359752",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-04-06",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "deborah s. renals v. john j. renals, jr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3359752 deborah s. renals v. john j. renals, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/deborah-s-renals-v-john-j-renals-jr-3355284"
    },
    {
      "slug": "deborah-s-renals-v-john-j-renals-jr-3362049",
      "title": "Deborah S. Renals v. John J. Renals, Jr.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Deborah S. Renals v. John J. Renals, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3366510/renals-v-renals-no-fa-98-6784-apr-6-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3366510",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-04-06",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "deborah s. renals v. john j. renals, jr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3366510 deborah s. renals v. john j. renals, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/deborah-s-renals-v-john-j-renals-jr-3362049"
    },
    {
      "slug": "deborah-yanosy-v-thomas-yanosy-3328160",
      "title": "Deborah Yanosy v. Thomas Yanosy.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Deborah Yanosy v. Thomas Yanosy.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3332660/yanosy-v-yanosy-no-fa-00-0069272-feb-23-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3332660",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-02-23",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "deborah yanosy v. thomas yanosy. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3332660 deborah yanosy v. thomas yanosy. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/deborah-yanosy-v-thomas-yanosy-3328160"
    },
    {
      "slug": "debra-a-hensch-v-john-t-hensch-3332070",
      "title": "Debra A. Hensch v. John T. Hensch.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Debra A. Hensch v. John T. Hensch.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3336565/hensch-v-hensch-no-fa01-0123556s-dec-20-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3336565",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-12-20",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "debra a. hensch v. john t. hensch. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3336565 debra a. hensch v. john t. hensch. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/debra-a-hensch-v-john-t-hensch-3332070"
    },
    {
      "slug": "debra-ann-consiglio-v-andrew-consiglio-3336239",
      "title": "Debra Ann Consiglio v. Andrew Consiglio.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Debra Ann Consiglio v. Andrew Consiglio.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3340728/consiglio-v-consiglio-no-fa-010454297-nov-13-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3340728",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-11-13",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "debra ann consiglio v. andrew consiglio. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3340728 debra ann consiglio v. andrew consiglio. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/debra-ann-consiglio-v-andrew-consiglio-3336239"
    },
    {
      "slug": "denise-a-bentley-v-kevin-c-bentley-3336358",
      "title": "Denise A. Bentley v. Kevin C. Bentley.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Denise A. Bentley v. Kevin C. Bentley.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3340847/bentley-v-bentley-no-fa99-0117610s-apr-30-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3340847",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-04-30",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "denise a. bentley v. kevin c. bentley. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3340847 denise a. bentley v. kevin c. bentley. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/denise-a-bentley-v-kevin-c-bentley-3336358"
    },
    {
      "slug": "denise-burton-smith-v-allan-m-smith-3338230",
      "title": "Denise Burton-Smith v. Allan M. Smith",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Denise Burton-Smith v. Allan M. Smith",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3342716/burton-smith-v-smith-no-fa96-0324828-s-nov-25-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3342716",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-11-25",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "denise burton-smith v. allan m. smith us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3342716 denise burton-smith v. allan m. smith qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/denise-burton-smith-v-allan-m-smith-3338230"
    },
    {
      "slug": "dennis-a-dowd-v-shrimatee-dowd-3347624",
      "title": "Dennis A. Dowd v. Shrimatee Dowd",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Dennis A. Dowd v. Shrimatee Dowd",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3352101/dowd-v-dowd-no-fa-96-0712085-s-nov-24-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3352101",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-11-24",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "dennis a. dowd v. shrimatee dowd us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3352101 dennis a. dowd v. shrimatee dowd qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/dennis-a-dowd-v-shrimatee-dowd-3347624"
    },
    {
      "slug": "diane-m-tenk-v-joseph-tenk-jr-3340931",
      "title": "Diane M. Tenk v. Joseph Tenk, Jr.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Diane M. Tenk v. Joseph Tenk, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3345416/tenk-v-tenk-no-fa-01-0342412-jul-11-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3345416",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-07-11",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "diane m. tenk v. joseph tenk, jr. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3345416 diane m. tenk v. joseph tenk, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/diane-m-tenk-v-joseph-tenk-jr-3340931"
    },
    {
      "slug": "dolores-l-briody-v-laurence-p-briody-3362249",
      "title": "Dolores L. Briody v. Laurence P. Briody",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Dolores L. Briody v. Laurence P. Briody",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3366710/briody-v-briody-no-fa-91-0307164-s-apr-23-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3366710",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-04-23",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "dolores l. briody v. laurence p. briody us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3366710 dolores l. briody v. laurence p. briody qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/dolores-l-briody-v-laurence-p-briody-3362249"
    },
    {
      "slug": "donald-blair-v-constance-sommer-3334708",
      "title": "Donald Blair v. Constance Sommer",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Donald Blair v. Constance Sommer",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3339199/blair-v-sommer-no-fa90-0110720-s-jan-7-1992/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3339199",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1992-01-07",
      "citation_year": 1992,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "donald blair v. constance sommer us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3339199 donald blair v. constance sommer qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/donald-blair-v-constance-sommer-3334708"
    },
    {
      "slug": "donald-hall-v-mary-hall-3355245",
      "title": "Donald Hall v. Mary Hall",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Donald Hall v. Mary Hall",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3359713/hall-v-hall-no-0105755-apr-20-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3359713",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-04-20",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "donald hall v. mary hall us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3359713 donald hall v. mary hall qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/donald-hall-v-mary-hall-3355245"
    },
    {
      "slug": "donald-konz-v-lorna-konz-3351936",
      "title": "Donald Konz v. Lorna Konz.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Donald Konz v. Lorna Konz.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3356406/konz-v-konz-no-fa99-0117929-jun-13-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3356406",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-06-13",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "donald konz v. lorna konz. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3356406 donald konz v. lorna konz. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/donald-konz-v-lorna-konz-3351936"
    },
    {
      "slug": "donald-n-campbell-jr-v-karen-a-campbell-3345157",
      "title": "Donald N. Campbell, Jr. v. Karen A. Campbell",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Donald N. Campbell, Jr. v. Karen A. Campbell",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3349636/campbell-v-campbell-no-32-09-84-oct-22-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3349636",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-10-22",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "donald n. campbell, jr. v. karen a. campbell us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3349636 donald n. campbell, jr. v. karen a. campbell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/donald-n-campbell-jr-v-karen-a-campbell-3345157"
    },
    {
      "slug": "donald-stearns-v-debra-c-stearns-3343459",
      "title": "Donald Stearns v. Debra C. Stearns.",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Donald Stearns v. Debra C. Stearns.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3347942/stearns-v-stearns-no-fa-98-0417654s-jan-24-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3347942",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-01-24",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "donald stearns v. debra c. stearns. us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3347942 donald stearns v. debra c. stearns. qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/donald-stearns-v-debra-c-stearns-3343459"
    },
    {
      "slug": "donna-claffey-v-robert-claffey-3333635",
      "title": "Donna Claffey v. Robert Claffey",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Donna Claffey v. Robert Claffey",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3338129/claffey-v-claffey-no-51-44-87-nov-8-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3338129",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-11-08",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "donna claffey v. robert claffey us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3338129 donna claffey v. robert claffey qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/donna-claffey-v-robert-claffey-3333635"
    },
    {
      "slug": "donna-k-nebelkopf-v-edwin-e-nebelkopf-3328111",
      "title": "Donna K. Nebelkopf v. Edwin E. Nebelkopf",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Donna K. Nebelkopf v. Edwin E. Nebelkopf",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3332611/nebelkopf-v-nebelkopf-no-fa-62848-s-dec-11-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3332611",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-12-11",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "donna k. nebelkopf v. edwin e. nebelkopf us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3332611 donna k. nebelkopf v. edwin e. nebelkopf qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/donna-k-nebelkopf-v-edwin-e-nebelkopf-3328111"
    },
    {
      "slug": "donna-m-kerwin-v-james-f-kerwin-3347658",
      "title": "Donna M. Kerwin v. James F. Kerwin",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Donna M. Kerwin v. James F. Kerwin",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3352135/kerwin-v-kerwin-no-fa97-0139754-dec-21-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3352135",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-12-21",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "donna m. kerwin v. james f. kerwin us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3352135 donna m. kerwin v. james f. kerwin qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/donna-m-kerwin-v-james-f-kerwin-3347658"
    },
    {
      "slug": "doreen-cisero-v-ronald-cosero-jr-3362308",
      "title": "Doreen Cisero v. Ronald Cosero, Jr.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Doreen Cisero v. Ronald Cosero, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3366769/cisero-v-cosero-no-fa92-0107802-dec-16-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3366769",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-12-16",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "doreen cisero v. ronald cosero, jr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3366769 doreen cisero v. ronald cosero, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/doreen-cisero-v-ronald-cosero-jr-3362308"
    },
    {
      "slug": "dorothy-buckwalter-blum-v-harold-blum-3348032",
      "title": "Dorothy Buckwalter-Blum v. Harold Blum",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Dorothy Buckwalter-Blum v. Harold Blum",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3352509/buckwalter-blum-v-blum-no-fa-92-0308964s-nov-4-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3352509",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-11-04",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "dorothy buckwalter-blum v. harold blum us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3352509 dorothy buckwalter-blum v. harold blum qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/dorothy-buckwalter-blum-v-harold-blum-3348032"
    },
    {
      "slug": "doryce-funteral-fine-v-steven-b-fine-3326375",
      "title": "Doryce Funteral-Fine v. Steven B. Fine",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Doryce Funteral-Fine v. Steven B. Fine",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3330875/funteral-fine-v-fine-no-fa98-0063294s-mar-17-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3330875",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-03-17",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "doryce funteral-fine v. steven b. fine us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3330875 doryce funteral-fine v. steven b. fine qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/doryce-funteral-fine-v-steven-b-fine-3326375"
    },
    {
      "slug": "douglas-craig-v-audrey-craig-3342433",
      "title": "Douglas Craig v. Audrey Craig",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Douglas Craig v. Audrey Craig",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3346917/craig-v-craig-no-fa-93-0064082-jul-27-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3346917",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-07-27",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "douglas craig v. audrey craig us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3346917 douglas craig v. audrey craig qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/douglas-craig-v-audrey-craig-3342433"
    },
    {
      "slug": "elaine-champagne-v-john-f-champagne-3333893",
      "title": "Elaine Champagne v. John F. Champagne.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Elaine Champagne v. John F. Champagne.",
      "extracted_docket_number": "from the Stamford Judicial District. It was tried o",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3338387/champagne-v-champagne-no-fa-98-0164250s-mar-13-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3338387",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-03-13",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "elaine champagne v. john f. champagne. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3338387 from the stamford judicial district. it was tried o elaine champagne v. john f. champagne. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/elaine-champagne-v-john-f-champagne-3333893"
    },
    {
      "slug": "elizabeth-b-riley-v-michael-e-riley-3359287",
      "title": "Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3363753/riley-v-riley-no-0074147-jan-23-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3363753",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-01-23",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "elizabeth b. riley v. michael e. riley us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3363753 elizabeth b. riley v. michael e. riley qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/elizabeth-b-riley-v-michael-e-riley-3359287"
    },
    {
      "slug": "elizabeth-b-riley-v-michael-e-riley-3368758",
      "title": "Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3373217/riley-v-riley-no-0074147-oct-11-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3373217",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-10-11",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "elizabeth b. riley v. michael e. riley us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3373217 elizabeth b. riley v. michael e. riley qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/elizabeth-b-riley-v-michael-e-riley-3368758"
    },
    {
      "slug": "elizabeth-c-dwyer-v-william-l-dwyer-3349873",
      "title": "Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3354347/dwyer-v-dwyer-no-fa-95-0377476-apr-4-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3354347",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-04-04",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "elizabeth c. dwyer v. william l. dwyer us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3354347 elizabeth c. dwyer v. william l. dwyer qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/elizabeth-c-dwyer-v-william-l-dwyer-3349873"
    },
    {
      "slug": "elizabeth-c-dwyer-v-william-l-dwyer-3366762",
      "title": "Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3371222/dwyer-v-dwyer-no-fa-95-0377476-apr-4-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3371222",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-04-04",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "elizabeth c. dwyer v. william l. dwyer us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3371222 elizabeth c. dwyer v. william l. dwyer qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/elizabeth-c-dwyer-v-william-l-dwyer-3366762"
    },
    {
      "slug": "elizabeth-cuozzo-v-pasquale-cuozzo-3343966",
      "title": "Elizabeth Cuozzo v. Pasquale Cuozzo",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Elizabeth Cuozzo v. Pasquale Cuozzo",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3348448/cuozzo-v-cuozzo-no-fa94-0140782-s-oct-11-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3348448",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-10-11",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "elizabeth cuozzo v. pasquale cuozzo us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3348448 elizabeth cuozzo v. pasquale cuozzo qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/elizabeth-cuozzo-v-pasquale-cuozzo-3343966"
    },
    {
      "slug": "ellen-p-banks-v-david-banks-3328604",
      "title": "Ellen P. Banks v. David Banks",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Ellen P. Banks v. David Banks",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3333104/banks-v-banks-no-fa92-0294939-s-jan-3-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3333104",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-01-03",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "ellen p. banks v. david banks us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3333104 ellen p. banks v. david banks qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/ellen-p-banks-v-david-banks-3328604"
    },
    {
      "slug": "eugenia-danes-v-lubomir-danes-3365955",
      "title": "Eugenia Danes v. Lubomir Danes",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Eugenia Danes v. Lubomir Danes",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3370415/danes-v-danes-no-fa96-0136613s-feb-22-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3370415",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-02-22",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "eugenia danes v. lubomir danes us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3370415 eugenia danes v. lubomir danes qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/eugenia-danes-v-lubomir-danes-3365955"
    },
    {
      "slug": "evelyn-forcier-v-gene-forcier-3358331",
      "title": "Evelyn Forcier v. Gene Forcier",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Evelyn Forcier v. Gene Forcier",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3362796/forcier-v-forcier-no-fa96-053549s-jan-7-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3362796",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-01-07",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "evelyn forcier v. gene forcier us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3362796 evelyn forcier v. gene forcier qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/evelyn-forcier-v-gene-forcier-3358331"
    },
    {
      "slug": "felix-oguagha-v-anthonia-oguagha-3365490",
      "title": "Felix Oguagha v. Anthonia Oguagha.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Felix Oguagha v. Anthonia Oguagha.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3369950/oguagha-v-oguagha-no-fa00-037-89-45-s-jan-7-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3369950",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-01-07",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "felix oguagha v. anthonia oguagha. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3369950 felix oguagha v. anthonia oguagha. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/felix-oguagha-v-anthonia-oguagha-3365490"
    },
    {
      "slug": "frances-reguero-v-wilfred-reguero-3342705",
      "title": "Frances Reguero v. Wilfred Reguero",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Frances Reguero v. Wilfred Reguero",
      "extracted_docket_number": "501418. The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3347189/reguero-v-reguero-no-fa94-0140531-s-dec-5-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3347189",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-12-05",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "frances reguero v. wilfred reguero us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3347189 501418. the frances reguero v. wilfred reguero qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/frances-reguero-v-wilfred-reguero-3342705"
    },
    {
      "slug": "francine-robinson-v-donald-robinson-3351212",
      "title": "Francine Robinson v. Donald Robinson.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Francine Robinson v. Donald Robinson.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3355685/robinson-v-robinson-no-fa01-0073012s-may-6-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3355685",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-05-06",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "francine robinson v. donald robinson. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3355685 francine robinson v. donald robinson. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/francine-robinson-v-donald-robinson-3351212"
    },
    {
      "slug": "francis-luca-v-cynthia-luca-3342608",
      "title": "Francis Luca v. Cynthia Luca",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Francis Luca v. Cynthia Luca",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3347092/luca-v-luca-no-fa93-0244478-sep-26-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3347092",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-09-26",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "francis luca v. cynthia luca us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3347092 francis luca v. cynthia luca qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/francis-luca-v-cynthia-luca-3342608"
    },
    {
      "slug": "frederick-k-depino-v-linda-depino-3349325",
      "title": "Frederick K. Depino v. Linda Depino",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Frederick K. Depino v. Linda Depino",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3353801/depino-v-depino-no-29-05-13-nov-7-1990/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3353801",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1990-11-07",
      "citation_year": 1990,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "frederick k. depino v. linda depino us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3353801 frederick k. depino v. linda depino qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/frederick-k-depino-v-linda-depino-3349325"
    },
    {
      "slug": "gail-rimkus-v-alfred-rimkus-3334193",
      "title": "Gail Rimkus v. Alfred Rimkus",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Gail Rimkus v. Alfred Rimkus",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3338686/rimkus-v-rimkus-no-fa98-0062482s-feb-28-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3338686",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-02-28",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "gail rimkus v. alfred rimkus us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3338686 gail rimkus v. alfred rimkus qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/gail-rimkus-v-alfred-rimkus-3334193"
    },
    {
      "slug": "gary-young-v-colleen-young-3339827",
      "title": "Gary Young v. Colleen Young",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Gary Young v. Colleen Young",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3344312/young-v-young-no-32-08-19-nov-7-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3344312",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-11-07",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "gary young v. colleen young us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3344312 gary young v. colleen young qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/gary-young-v-colleen-young-3339827"
    },
    {
      "slug": "gayle-e-crandall-v-charles-g-crandall-3365994",
      "title": "Gayle E. Crandall v. Charles G. Crandall.",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Gayle E. Crandall v. Charles G. Crandall.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3370454/crandall-v-crandall-no-60249-jun-16-1992/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3370454",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1992-06-16",
      "citation_year": 1992,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "gayle e. crandall v. charles g. crandall. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3370454 gayle e. crandall v. charles g. crandall. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/gayle-e-crandall-v-charles-g-crandall-3365994"
    },
    {
      "slug": "gene-delicato-v-barbara-delicato-3368114",
      "title": "Gene Delicato v. Barbara Delicato.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Gene Delicato v. Barbara Delicato.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3372574/delicato-v-delicato-no-0549379-jun-23-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3372574",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-06-23",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "gene delicato v. barbara delicato. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3372574 gene delicato v. barbara delicato. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/gene-delicato-v-barbara-delicato-3368114"
    },
    {
      "slug": "gregg-frosceno-v-lynn-frosceno-3347682",
      "title": "Gregg Frosceno v. Lynn Frosceno",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Gregg Frosceno v. Lynn Frosceno",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3352159/frosceno-v-frosceno-no-fa98-062634-feb-2-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3352159",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-02-02",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "gregg frosceno v. lynn frosceno us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3352159 gregg frosceno v. lynn frosceno qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/gregg-frosceno-v-lynn-frosceno-3347682"
    },
    {
      "slug": "gregory-smalter-v-nancy-smalter-3326502",
      "title": "Gregory Smalter v. Nancy Smalter",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Gregory Smalter v. Nancy Smalter",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3331002/smalter-v-smalter-no-fa95-0148736-s-oct-10-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3331002",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-10-10",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "gregory smalter v. nancy smalter us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3331002 gregory smalter v. nancy smalter qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/gregory-smalter-v-nancy-smalter-3326502"
    },
    {
      "slug": "hai-tran-v-binhminh-tran-3328195",
      "title": "Hai Tran v. Binhminh Tran",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Hai Tran v. Binhminh Tran",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3332695/hai-tran-v-binhminh-tran-no-325628-may-27-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3332695",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-05-27",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "hai tran v. binhminh tran us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3332695 hai tran v. binhminh tran qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/hai-tran-v-binhminh-tran-3328195"
    },
    {
      "slug": "hannah-m-soboleski-v-john-a-soboleski-jr-3360936",
      "title": "Hannah M. Soboleski v. John A. Soboleski, Jr.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Hannah M. Soboleski v. John A. Soboleski, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3365400/soboleski-v-soboleski-no-30-82-44-jun-17-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3365400",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-06-17",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "hannah m. soboleski v. john a. soboleski, jr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3365400 hannah m. soboleski v. john a. soboleski, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/hannah-m-soboleski-v-john-a-soboleski-jr-3360936"
    },
    {
      "slug": "harry-c-geloso-v-anna-t-geloso-3330824",
      "title": "Harry C. Geloso v. Anna T. Geloso",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Harry C. Geloso v. Anna T. Geloso",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3335320/geloso-v-geloso-no-fa96-0056072s-feb-3-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3335320",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-02-03",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "harry c. geloso v. anna t. geloso us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3335320 harry c. geloso v. anna t. geloso qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/harry-c-geloso-v-anna-t-geloso-3330824"
    },
    {
      "slug": "holly-m-hargitt-v-terry-a-hargitt-3327124",
      "title": "Holly M. Hargitt v. Terry A. Hargitt.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Holly M. Hargitt v. Terry A. Hargitt.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3331623/hargitt-v-hargitt-no-fa-98-0063749-apr-14-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3331623",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-04-18",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "holly m. hargitt v. terry a. hargitt. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3331623 holly m. hargitt v. terry a. hargitt. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/holly-m-hargitt-v-terry-a-hargitt-3327124"
    },
    {
      "slug": "howard-j-alger-v-sara-k-alger-3328615",
      "title": "Howard J. Alger v. Sara K. Alger",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Howard J. Alger v. Sara K. Alger",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3333115/alger-v-alger-no-fa98-86164-apr-1-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3333115",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-04-01",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "howard j. alger v. sara k. alger us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3333115 howard j. alger v. sara k. alger qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/howard-j-alger-v-sara-k-alger-3328615"
    },
    {
      "slug": "in-re-the-marriage-of-raul-and-ingrid-obrecht-raul-obrecht-appellant-v-ingrid-obrecht-resp",
      "title": "In Re the Marriage of RAUL and INGRID OBRECHT. RAUL OBRECHT, Appellant, v. INGRID OBRECHT, Respondent",
      "citation": "245 Cal. App. 4th 1",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In Re the Marriage of RAUL and INGRID OBRECHT. RAUL OBRECHT, Appellant, v. INGRID OBRECHT, Respondent",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "245 Cal. App. 4th 1",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3180054/obrecht-v-obrecht/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3180054",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2016-02-24",
      "citation_year": 2016,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "in re the marriage of raul and ingrid obrecht. raul obrecht, appellant, v. ingrid obrecht, respondent 245 cal. app. 4th 1 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3180054 245 cal. app. 4th 1 in re the marriage of raul and ingrid obrecht. raul obrecht, appellant, v. ingrid obrecht, respondent qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/in-re-the-marriage-of-raul-and-ingrid-obrecht-raul-obrecht-appellant-v-ingrid-obrecht-resp"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jacqueline-barton-v-ronald-barton-3366799",
      "title": "Jacqueline Barton v. Ronald Barton",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Jacqueline Barton v. Ronald Barton",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3371259/barton-v-barton-no-fa-90-306984-dec-31-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3371259",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-12-31",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "jacqueline barton v. ronald barton us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3371259 jacqueline barton v. ronald barton qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jacqueline-barton-v-ronald-barton-3366799"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jacqueline-r-regan-v-william-j-regan-jr-3370800",
      "title": "Jacqueline R. Regan v. William J. Regan, Jr.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Jacqueline R. Regan v. William J. Regan, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3375256/regan-v-regan-no-fa94-04-80-08-aug-8-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3375256",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-08-08",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "jacqueline r. regan v. william j. regan, jr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3375256 jacqueline r. regan v. william j. regan, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jacqueline-r-regan-v-william-j-regan-jr-3370800"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jacqueline-teulings-v-robert-teulings-3353650",
      "title": "Jacqueline Teulings v. Robert Teulings",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Jacqueline Teulings v. Robert Teulings",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3358118/teulings-v-teulings-no-fa-97-0396872s-jan-15-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3358118",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-01-15",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "jacqueline teulings v. robert teulings us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3358118 jacqueline teulings v. robert teulings qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jacqueline-teulings-v-robert-teulings-3353650"
    },
    {
      "slug": "james-c-smith-v-barbara-jean-smith-3358258",
      "title": "James C. Smith v. Barbara-Jean Smith",
      "citation": "653 A.2d 1259",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "James C. Smith v. Barbara-Jean Smith",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "653 A.2d 1259",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3362723/smith-v-smith-no-fa-93-53025-s-may-19-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3362723",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-05-19",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "james c. smith v. barbara-jean smith 653 a.2d 1259 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3362723 653 a.2d 1259 james c. smith v. barbara-jean smith qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/james-c-smith-v-barbara-jean-smith-3358258"
    },
    {
      "slug": "james-cody-v-colette-cody-3367897",
      "title": "James Cody v. Colette Cody",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "James Cody v. Colette Cody",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3372357/cody-v-cody-no-fa90-0106919-s-jul-25-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3372357",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-07-25",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "james cody v. colette cody us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3372357 james cody v. colette cody qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/james-cody-v-colette-cody-3367897"
    },
    {
      "slug": "james-rapuano-v-karyn-rapuano-3341656",
      "title": "James Rapuano v. Karyn Rapuano.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "James Rapuano v. Karyn Rapuano.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3346141/rapuano-v-rapuano-no-fa-01-0447559-s-aug-19-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3346141",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-08-19",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "james rapuano v. karyn rapuano. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3346141 james rapuano v. karyn rapuano. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/james-rapuano-v-karyn-rapuano-3341656"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jamieson-v-korab-v-patricia-c-korab-3327562",
      "title": "Jamieson v. Korab v. Patricia C. Korab.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Jamieson v. Korab v. Patricia C. Korab.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3332062/korab-v-korab-no-fa00-0092713-s-mar-14-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3332062",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-03-14",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "jamieson v. korab v. patricia c. korab. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3332062 jamieson v. korab v. patricia c. korab. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jamieson-v-korab-v-patricia-c-korab-3327562"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jane-m-pierwola-v-stanley-a-pierwola-3372274",
      "title": "Jane M. Pierwola v. Stanley A. Pierwola",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Jane M. Pierwola v. Stanley A. Pierwola",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3376728/pierwola-v-pierwola-no-31-19-42-mar-11-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3376728",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-03-11",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "jane m. pierwola v. stanley a. pierwola us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3376728 jane m. pierwola v. stanley a. pierwola qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jane-m-pierwola-v-stanley-a-pierwola-3372274"
    },
    {
      "slug": "janet-k-root-v-robert-j-root-3366054",
      "title": "Janet K. Root v. Robert J. Root.",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Janet K. Root v. Robert J. Root.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3370514/root-v-root-no-fa99-89879-may-10-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3370514",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-05-10",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "janet k. root v. robert j. root. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3370514 janet k. root v. robert j. root. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/janet-k-root-v-robert-j-root-3366054"
    },
    {
      "slug": "janet-lucas-v-george-lucas-3350403",
      "title": "Janet Lucas v. George Lucas",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Janet Lucas v. George Lucas",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3354877/lucas-v-lucas-no-fa93-04-33-57-nov-3-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3354877",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-11-03",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "janet lucas v. george lucas domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3354877 domestic relations order janet lucas v. george lucas qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/janet-lucas-v-george-lucas-3350403"
    },
    {
      "slug": "janice-torres-v-israel-torres-3371857",
      "title": "Janice Torres v. Israel Torres.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Janice Torres v. Israel Torres.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3376312/torres-v-torres-no-fa-00-0724484s-apr-1-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3376312",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-04-01",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "janice torres v. israel torres. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3376312 janice torres v. israel torres. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/janice-torres-v-israel-torres-3371857"
    },
    {
      "slug": "janis-bonner-v-chris-bonner-3344623",
      "title": "Janis Bonner v. Chris Bonner",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Janis Bonner v. Chris Bonner",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3349103/bonner-v-bonner-no-fa94-0136965-s-mar-19-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3349103",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-03-19",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "janis bonner v. chris bonner us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3349103 janis bonner v. chris bonner qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/janis-bonner-v-chris-bonner-3344623"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jean-ann-monroe-v-bruce-allen-monroe-3338265",
      "title": "Jean Ann Monroe v. Bruce Allen Monroe.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Jean Ann Monroe v. Bruce Allen Monroe.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3342751/monroe-v-monroe-no-fa000339116-jan-5-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3342751",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-01-05",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "jean ann monroe v. bruce allen monroe. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3342751 jean ann monroe v. bruce allen monroe. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jean-ann-monroe-v-bruce-allen-monroe-3338265"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jeannette-kilcourse-v-michael-w-kilcourse-3337769",
      "title": "Jeannette Kilcourse v. Michael W. Kilcourse.",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Jeannette Kilcourse v. Michael W. Kilcourse.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3342255/kilcourse-v-kilcourse-no-fa99-0153203s-mar-26-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3342255",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-03-26",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "jeannette kilcourse v. michael w. kilcourse. domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3342255 domestic relations order jeannette kilcourse v. michael w. kilcourse. qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jeannette-kilcourse-v-michael-w-kilcourse-3337769"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jill-raynor-v-robert-raynor-3327087",
      "title": "Jill Raynor v. Robert Raynor",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Jill Raynor v. Robert Raynor",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3331586/raynor-v-raynor-no-fa94-04-67-90s-jul-27-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3331586",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-07-27",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "jill raynor v. robert raynor us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3331586 jill raynor v. robert raynor qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jill-raynor-v-robert-raynor-3327087"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jo-ann-dwyer-v-james-dwyer-3351422",
      "title": "Jo Ann Dwyer v. James Dwyer.",
      "citation": "qualified Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Jo Ann Dwyer v. James Dwyer.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3355895/dwyer-v-dwyer-no-fa89-0099150-s-aug-14-1990/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3355895",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1990-08-14",
      "citation_year": 1990,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "jo ann dwyer v. james dwyer. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3355895 jo ann dwyer v. james dwyer. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jo-ann-dwyer-v-james-dwyer-3351422"
    },
    {
      "slug": "joan-fowler-v-barry-fowler-3369156",
      "title": "Joan Fowler v. Barry Fowler",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Joan Fowler v. Barry Fowler",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3373615/fowler-v-fowler-no-fa95-0051903s-mar-4-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3373615",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-03-04",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "joan fowler v. barry fowler us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3373615 joan fowler v. barry fowler qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/joan-fowler-v-barry-fowler-3369156"
    },
    {
      "slug": "joann-elliott-v-michael-elliott-3355641",
      "title": "Joann Elliott v. Michael Elliott",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Joann Elliott v. Michael Elliott",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3360108/elliott-v-elliott-no-fa98-0060903s-nov-17-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3360108",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-11-17",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "joann elliott v. michael elliott us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3360108 joann elliott v. michael elliott qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/joann-elliott-v-michael-elliott-3355641"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-c-carlton-sr-v-ann-carlton-3343277",
      "title": "John C. Carlton, Sr. v. Ann Carlton.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John C. Carlton, Sr. v. Ann Carlton.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3347760/carlton-v-carlton-no-300158-jan-16-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3347760",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-01-16",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john c. carlton, sr. v. ann carlton. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3347760 john c. carlton, sr. v. ann carlton. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-c-carlton-sr-v-ann-carlton-3343277"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-cierniewski-v-anna-cierniewski-3340244",
      "title": "John Cierniewski v. Anna Cierniewski.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John Cierniewski v. Anna Cierniewski.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3344729/cierniewski-v-cierniewski-no-fa99-049-28-28-98-nov-3-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3344729",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-11-03",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john cierniewski v. anna cierniewski. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3344729 john cierniewski v. anna cierniewski. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-cierniewski-v-anna-cierniewski-3340244"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-coughlin-v-cara-coughlin-3349077",
      "title": "John Coughlin v. Cara Coughlin",
      "citation": "qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John Coughlin v. Cara Coughlin",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3353553/coughlin-v-coughlin-fa-96-0388627-s-mar-10-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3353553",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-03-10",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john coughlin v. cara coughlin us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3353553 john coughlin v. cara coughlin qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-coughlin-v-cara-coughlin-3349077"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-coughlin-v-cara-coughlin-3361750",
      "title": "John Coughlin v. Cara Coughlin",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John Coughlin v. Cara Coughlin",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3366212/coughlin-v-coughlin-no-fa96-0388627s-jan-26-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3366212",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-01-26",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john coughlin v. cara coughlin us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3366212 john coughlin v. cara coughlin qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-coughlin-v-cara-coughlin-3361750"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-daniels-v-madoria-daniels-3371377",
      "title": "John Daniels v. Madoria Daniels",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John Daniels v. Madoria Daniels",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3375834/daniels-v-daniels-no-fa-98-0410286-s-apr-29-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3375834",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-04-29",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john daniels v. madoria daniels us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3375834 john daniels v. madoria daniels qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-daniels-v-madoria-daniels-3371377"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-heuss-v-patricia-heuss-3345799",
      "title": "John Heuss v. Patricia Heuss.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John Heuss v. Patricia Heuss.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3350277/heuss-v-heuss-no-cv90-0109179-s-jun-7-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3350277",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-06-07",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john heuss v. patricia heuss. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3350277 john heuss v. patricia heuss. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-heuss-v-patricia-heuss-3345799"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-kozlowski-v-sandra-kozlowski-3350375",
      "title": "John Kozlowski v. Sandra Kozlowski.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John Kozlowski v. Sandra Kozlowski.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3354849/kozlowski-v-kozlowski-no-fa99-0434893-oct-10-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3354849",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-10-10",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john kozlowski v. sandra kozlowski. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3354849 john kozlowski v. sandra kozlowski. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-kozlowski-v-sandra-kozlowski-3350375"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-lescott-v-robin-lescott-3337445",
      "title": "John Lescott v. Robin Lescott.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John Lescott v. Robin Lescott.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3341932/lescott-v-lescott-no-fa90-0109205-jun-7-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3341932",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-06-07",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john lescott v. robin lescott. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3341932 john lescott v. robin lescott. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-lescott-v-robin-lescott-3337445"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-newkirk-v-melanie-newkirk-3365808",
      "title": "John Newkirk v. Melanie Newkirk.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John Newkirk v. Melanie Newkirk.",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of years and is well liked and respected",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3370268/newkirk-v-newkirk-no-fa00-0082003s-oct-1-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3370268",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-10-01",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john newkirk v. melanie newkirk. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3370268 of years and is well liked and respected john newkirk v. melanie newkirk. qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-newkirk-v-melanie-newkirk-3365808"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-p-havanec-v-mary-ellen-havanec-3336666",
      "title": "John P. Havanec v. Mary Ellen Havanec.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John P. Havanec v. Mary Ellen Havanec.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3341154/havanec-v-havanec-no-fa-93-0718344-s-nov-28-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3341154",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-11-28",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john p. havanec v. mary ellen havanec. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3341154 john p. havanec v. mary ellen havanec. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-p-havanec-v-mary-ellen-havanec-3336666"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-p-havanec-v-mary-ellen-havanec-3367036",
      "title": "John P. Havanec v. Mary Ellen Havanec.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John P. Havanec v. Mary Ellen Havanec.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3371496/havanec-v-havanec-no-fa-98-0718344-s-nov-17-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3371496",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-11-17",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john p. havanec v. mary ellen havanec. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3371496 john p. havanec v. mary ellen havanec. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-p-havanec-v-mary-ellen-havanec-3367036"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-robert-mosher-v-alexandra-mosher-3356869",
      "title": "John Robert Mosher v. Alexandra Mosher",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John Robert Mosher v. Alexandra Mosher",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3361335/mosher-v-mosher-no-fa-98-0354755-mar-9-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3361335",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-03-09",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "john robert mosher v. alexandra mosher us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3361335 john robert mosher v. alexandra mosher qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-robert-mosher-v-alexandra-mosher-3356869"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jon-guzallis-v-elizabeth-guzallis-3361229",
      "title": "Jon Guzallis v. Elizabeth Guzallis",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Jon Guzallis v. Elizabeth Guzallis",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3365692/guzallis-v-guzallis-no-0116014-oct-26-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3365692",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-10-26",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "jon guzallis v. elizabeth guzallis us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3365692 jon guzallis v. elizabeth guzallis qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jon-guzallis-v-elizabeth-guzallis-3361229"
    },
    {
      "slug": "joseph-birch-v-ann-birch-3329241",
      "title": "Joseph Birch v. Ann Birch",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Joseph Birch v. Ann Birch",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3333738/birch-v-birch-no-fa99-0066730s-feb-1-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3333738",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-02-01",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "joseph birch v. ann birch us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3333738 joseph birch v. ann birch qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/joseph-birch-v-ann-birch-3329241"
    },
    {
      "slug": "joseph-kostya-v-barbara-kostya-3766798",
      "title": "Joseph Kostya v. Barbara Kostya",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Joseph Kostya v. Barbara Kostya",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4011750/kostya-v-kostya-unpublished-decision-12-13-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4011750",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-12-13",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "joseph kostya v. barbara kostya us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 4011750 joseph kostya v. barbara kostya qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/joseph-kostya-v-barbara-kostya-3766798"
    },
    {
      "slug": "joseph-v-raia-v-valerie-anne-raia-3327260",
      "title": "Joseph v. Raia v. Valerie Anne Raia",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Joseph v. Raia v. Valerie Anne Raia",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3331759/raia-v-raia-no-32-48-77-feb-10-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3331759",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-02-10",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "joseph v. raia v. valerie anne raia us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3331759 joseph v. raia v. valerie anne raia qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/joseph-v-raia-v-valerie-anne-raia-3327260"
    },
    {
      "slug": "joyce-ethel-burrill-v-eugene-burrill-3330836",
      "title": "Joyce Ethel Burrill v. Eugene Burrill",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Joyce Ethel Burrill v. Eugene Burrill",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3335332/burrill-v-burrill-no-fa-95-0380969-oct-22-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3335332",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-10-22",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "joyce ethel burrill v. eugene burrill us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3335332 joyce ethel burrill v. eugene burrill qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/joyce-ethel-burrill-v-eugene-burrill-3330836"
    },
    {
      "slug": "joyce-jensen-v-dennis-jensen-3357186",
      "title": "Joyce Jensen v. Dennis Jensen",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Joyce Jensen v. Dennis Jensen",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3361652/jensen-v-jensen-no-fa92-0125515-s-apr-1-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3361652",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-04-01",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "joyce jensen v. dennis jensen us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3361652 joyce jensen v. dennis jensen qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/joyce-jensen-v-dennis-jensen-3357186"
    },
    {
      "slug": "judith-kuhn-v-mark-kuhn-3356508",
      "title": "Judith Kuhn v. Mark Kuhn.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Judith Kuhn v. Mark Kuhn.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3360974/kuhn-v-kuhn-no-0120780-oct-16-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3360974",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-10-16",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "judith kuhn v. mark kuhn. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3360974 judith kuhn v. mark kuhn. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/judith-kuhn-v-mark-kuhn-3356508"
    },
    {
      "slug": "judith-rodwin-v-roger-rodwin-3336691",
      "title": "Judith Rodwin v. Roger Rodwin",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Judith Rodwin v. Roger Rodwin",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3341179/rodwin-v-rodwin-no-fa-89-0104171-s-nov-15-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3341179",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-11-15",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "judith rodwin v. roger rodwin us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3341179 judith rodwin v. roger rodwin qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/judith-rodwin-v-roger-rodwin-3336691"
    },
    {
      "slug": "june-c-borgman-v-daniel-h-borgman-3326483",
      "title": "June C. Borgman v. Daniel H. Borgman",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "June C. Borgman v. Daniel H. Borgman",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3330983/borgman-v-borgman-no-fa93-0134945-s-jul-14-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3330983",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-07-14",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "june c. borgman v. daniel h. borgman us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3330983 june c. borgman v. daniel h. borgman qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/june-c-borgman-v-daniel-h-borgman-3326483"
    },
    {
      "slug": "karen-gabriel-v-james-gabriel-3334090",
      "title": "Karen Gabriel v. James Gabriel",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Karen Gabriel v. James Gabriel",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3338583/gabriel-v-gabriel-no-fa93-0135171-s-apr-24-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3338583",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-04-24",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "karen gabriel v. james gabriel us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3338583 karen gabriel v. james gabriel qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/karen-gabriel-v-james-gabriel-3334090"
    },
    {
      "slug": "karen-lombardi-v-john-lombardi-3339109",
      "title": "Karen Lombardi v. John Lombardi",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Karen Lombardi v. John Lombardi",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3343595/lombardi-v-lombardi-no-fa96-0054059s-feb-4-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3343595",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-02-04",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "karen lombardi v. john lombardi us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3343595 karen lombardi v. john lombardi qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/karen-lombardi-v-john-lombardi-3339109"
    },
    {
      "slug": "karl-w-murphy-v-linda-s-murphy-3363108",
      "title": "Karl W. Murphy v. Linda S. Murphy",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Karl W. Murphy v. Linda S. Murphy",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3367569/murphy-v-murphy-no-31-17-40-oct-28-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3367569",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-10-28",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "karl w. murphy v. linda s. murphy us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3367569 karl w. murphy v. linda s. murphy qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/karl-w-murphy-v-linda-s-murphy-3363108"
    },
    {
      "slug": "kathryn-a-colandrea-v-dennis-colandrea-3337820",
      "title": "Kathryn A. Colandrea v. Dennis Colandrea",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Kathryn A. Colandrea v. Dennis Colandrea",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3342306/colandrea-v-colandrea-no-fa-98-0410833s-feb-8-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3342306",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-02-08",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "kathryn a. colandrea v. dennis colandrea us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3342306 kathryn a. colandrea v. dennis colandrea qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/kathryn-a-colandrea-v-dennis-colandrea-3337820"
    },
    {
      "slug": "kathryn-m-trainor-v-james-w-trainor-3356155",
      "title": "Kathryn M. Trainor v. James W. Trainor",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Kathryn M. Trainor v. James W. Trainor",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3360621/trainor-v-trainor-no-0320022-feb-17-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3360621",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-02-17",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "kathryn m. trainor v. james w. trainor us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3360621 kathryn m. trainor v. james w. trainor qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/kathryn-m-trainor-v-james-w-trainor-3356155"
    },
    {
      "slug": "kevin-o-malley-v-jeanne-o-malley-ct-page-4732-3328105",
      "title": "Kevin O'Malley v. Jeanne O'Malley Ct Page 4732",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Kevin O'Malley v. Jeanne O'Malley Ct Page 4732",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3332605/omalley-v-omalley-no-fa95-0146805-s-apr-3-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3332605",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-04-03",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "kevin o'malley v. jeanne o'malley ct page 4732 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3332605 kevin o'malley v. jeanne o'malley ct page 4732 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/kevin-o-malley-v-jeanne-o-malley-ct-page-4732-3328105"
    },
    {
      "slug": "laurie-m-ahearn-v-michael-y-ahearn-3335456",
      "title": "Laurie M. Ahearn v. Michael Y. Ahearn",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Laurie M. Ahearn v. Michael Y. Ahearn",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3339945/ahearn-v-ahearn-no-fa96-0325340s-apr-3-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3339945",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-04-03",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "laurie m. ahearn v. michael y. ahearn us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3339945 laurie m. ahearn v. michael y. ahearn qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/laurie-m-ahearn-v-michael-y-ahearn-3335456"
    },
    {
      "slug": "leah-ann-hawley-v-james-p-murphy-3360646",
      "title": "Leah Ann Hawley v. James P. Murphy",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Leah Ann Hawley v. James P. Murphy",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3365110/hawley-v-murphy-no-fa95-0050971s-aug-2-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3365110",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-08-02",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "leah ann hawley v. james p. murphy us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3365110 leah ann hawley v. james p. murphy qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/leah-ann-hawley-v-james-p-murphy-3360646"
    },
    {
      "slug": "leuisa-zurlo-v-carmine-zurlo-3328324",
      "title": "Leuisa Zurlo v. Carmine Zurlo.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Leuisa Zurlo v. Carmine Zurlo.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3332824/zurlo-v-zurlo-no-fa-01-045531-sep-6-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3332824",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-09-06",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "leuisa zurlo v. carmine zurlo. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3332824 leuisa zurlo v. carmine zurlo. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/leuisa-zurlo-v-carmine-zurlo-3328324"
    },
    {
      "slug": "linda-bevilacqua-v-albert-bevilacqua-3338767",
      "title": "Linda Bevilacqua v. Albert Bevilacqua",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Linda Bevilacqua v. Albert Bevilacqua",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3343253/bevilacqua-v-bevilacqua-no-fa-97-0346477s-jan-20-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3343253",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-01-20",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "linda bevilacqua v. albert bevilacqua domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3343253 domestic relations order linda bevilacqua v. albert bevilacqua qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/linda-bevilacqua-v-albert-bevilacqua-3338767"
    },
    {
      "slug": "linda-burdick-v-joseph-burdick-3329301",
      "title": "Linda Burdick v. Joseph Burdick",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Linda Burdick v. Joseph Burdick",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3333798/burdick-v-burdick-no-0541375-oct-7-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3333798",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-10-07",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "linda burdick v. joseph burdick us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3333798 linda burdick v. joseph burdick qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/linda-burdick-v-joseph-burdick-3329301"
    },
    {
      "slug": "lizbeth-friedman-v-jess-friedman-3371915",
      "title": "Lizbeth Friedman v. Jess Friedman.",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Lizbeth Friedman v. Jess Friedman.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3376370/friedman-v-friedman-no-fa-01-0450825-s-feb-6-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3376370",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-02-06",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "lizbeth friedman v. jess friedman. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3376370 lizbeth friedman v. jess friedman. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/lizbeth-friedman-v-jess-friedman-3371915"
    },
    {
      "slug": "lorraine-r-dobosz-v-paul-e-dobosz-3339092",
      "title": "Lorraine R. Dobosz v. Paul E. Dobosz.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Lorraine R. Dobosz v. Paul E. Dobosz.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3343578/dobosz-v-dobosz-no-382634-dec-6-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3343578",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-12-06",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "lorraine r. dobosz v. paul e. dobosz. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3343578 lorraine r. dobosz v. paul e. dobosz. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/lorraine-r-dobosz-v-paul-e-dobosz-3339092"
    },
    {
      "slug": "lyle-snide-v-stephanie-snide-3346237",
      "title": "Lyle Snide v. Stephanie Snide",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Lyle Snide v. Stephanie Snide",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3350715/snide-v-snide-no-0547785-jan-5-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3350715",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-01-05",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "lyle snide v. stephanie snide us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3350715 lyle snide v. stephanie snide qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/lyle-snide-v-stephanie-snide-3346237"
    },
    {
      "slug": "lynne-simonds-v-michael-simonds-3355687",
      "title": "Lynne Simonds v. Michael Simonds",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Lynne Simonds v. Michael Simonds",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3360154/simonds-v-simonds-no-fa92-04-16-01-mar-31-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3360154",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-03-31",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "lynne simonds v. michael simonds us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3360154 lynne simonds v. michael simonds qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/lynne-simonds-v-michael-simonds-3355687"
    },
    {
      "slug": "maria-d-roche-v-jose-ramon-diaz-3346156",
      "title": "Maria D. Roche v. Jose Ramon Diaz.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Maria D. Roche v. Jose Ramon Diaz.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3350634/roche-v-diaz-no-fa000063246s-jul-20-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3350634",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-07-20",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "maria d. roche v. jose ramon diaz. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3350634 maria d. roche v. jose ramon diaz. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/maria-d-roche-v-jose-ramon-diaz-3346156"
    },
    {
      "slug": "maria-m-trombetta-v-franco-n-trombetta-sr-3340453",
      "title": "Maria M. Trombetta v. Franco N. Trombetta, Sr.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Maria M. Trombetta v. Franco N. Trombetta, Sr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3344938/trombetta-v-trombetta-no-fa00-037-74-49-feb-20-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3344938",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-02-20",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "maria m. trombetta v. franco n. trombetta, sr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3344938 maria m. trombetta v. franco n. trombetta, sr. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/maria-m-trombetta-v-franco-n-trombetta-sr-3340453"
    },
    {
      "slug": "maria-passante-v-jeffrey-passante-3355232",
      "title": "Maria Passante v. Jeffrey Passante",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Maria Passante v. Jeffrey Passante",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3359700/passante-v-passante-no-fa99-89096-jan-26-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3359700",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-01-26",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "maria passante v. jeffrey passante us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3359700 maria passante v. jeffrey passante qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/maria-passante-v-jeffrey-passante-3355232"
    },
    {
      "slug": "maria-pollastro-v-sabatino-pollastro-3344615",
      "title": "Maria Pollastro v. Sabatino Pollastro",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Maria Pollastro v. Sabatino Pollastro",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3349095/pollastro-v-pollastro-no-fa92-03-88-22s-nov-9-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3349095",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-11-09",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "maria pollastro v. sabatino pollastro us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3349095 maria pollastro v. sabatino pollastro qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/maria-pollastro-v-sabatino-pollastro-3344615"
    },
    {
      "slug": "marian-claire-moore-v-joseph-moore-3370045",
      "title": "Marian Claire Moore v. Joseph Moore",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Marian Claire Moore v. Joseph Moore",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3374503/moore-v-moore-no-fa93-04-34-26s-nov-29-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3374503",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-11-29",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "marian claire moore v. joseph moore us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3374503 marian claire moore v. joseph moore qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/marian-claire-moore-v-joseph-moore-3370045"
    },
    {
      "slug": "marie-marini-carminucci-v-robert-carminucci-3325478",
      "title": "Marie Marini Carminucci v. Robert Carminucci",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Marie Marini Carminucci v. Robert Carminucci",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3329980/carminucci-v-carminucci-no-fa94-013-87-67-s-feb-14-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3329980",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-02-14",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "marie marini carminucci v. robert carminucci us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3329980 marie marini carminucci v. robert carminucci qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/marie-marini-carminucci-v-robert-carminucci-3325478"
    },
    {
      "slug": "marilyn-payne-v-donald-j-payne-3344482",
      "title": "Marilyn Payne v. Donald J. Payne.",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Marilyn Payne v. Donald J. Payne.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3348962/payne-v-payne-no-26-54-26-oct-4-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3348962",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-10-04",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "marilyn payne v. donald j. payne. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3348962 marilyn payne v. donald j. payne. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/marilyn-payne-v-donald-j-payne-3344482"
    },
    {
      "slug": "mary-ann-chapman-v-peter-j-chapman-3354557",
      "title": "Mary Ann Chapman v. Peter J. Chapman",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Mary Ann Chapman v. Peter J. Chapman",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3359025/chapman-v-chapman-no-0115431-jul-27-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3359025",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-07-27",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "mary ann chapman v. peter j. chapman us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3359025 mary ann chapman v. peter j. chapman qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/mary-ann-chapman-v-peter-j-chapman-3354557"
    },
    {
      "slug": "mary-ann-o-brien-v-terrence-j-o-brien-3360239",
      "title": "Mary Ann O'Brien v. Terrence J. O'Brien",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Mary Ann O'Brien v. Terrence J. O'Brien",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3364704/obrien-v-obrien-no-75159-dec-4-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3364704",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-12-04",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "mary ann o'brien v. terrence j. o'brien us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3364704 mary ann o'brien v. terrence j. o'brien qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/mary-ann-o-brien-v-terrence-j-o-brien-3360239"
    },
    {
      "slug": "mary-bocialetti-v-frank-bocialetti-3356299",
      "title": "Mary Bocialetti v. Frank Bocialetti",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Mary Bocialetti v. Frank Bocialetti",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3360765/bocialetti-v-bocialetti-no-fa93-04-19-46s-jan-31-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3360765",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-01-31",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "mary bocialetti v. frank bocialetti us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3360765 mary bocialetti v. frank bocialetti qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/mary-bocialetti-v-frank-bocialetti-3356299"
    },
    {
      "slug": "mary-hickenbottom-v-joseph-hickenbottom-3367696",
      "title": "Mary Hickenbottom v. Joseph Hickenbottom.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Mary Hickenbottom v. Joseph Hickenbottom.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3372156/hickenbottom-v-hickenbottom-no-fa00-0178810s-aug-1-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3372156",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-08-01",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "mary hickenbottom v. joseph hickenbottom. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3372156 mary hickenbottom v. joseph hickenbottom. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/mary-hickenbottom-v-joseph-hickenbottom-3367696"
    },
    {
      "slug": "mary-r-kaiser-v-john-kaiser-3347584",
      "title": "Mary R. Kaiser v. John Kaiser",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Mary R. Kaiser v. John Kaiser",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3352061/kaiser-v-kaiser-no-fa86-0226902-apr-22-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3352061",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-04-22",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "mary r. kaiser v. john kaiser us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3352061 mary r. kaiser v. john kaiser qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/mary-r-kaiser-v-john-kaiser-3347584"
    },
    {
      "slug": "maryann-fox-v-larry-craig-fox-3341394",
      "title": "Maryann Fox v. Larry Craig Fox",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Maryann Fox v. Larry Craig Fox",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3345879/fox-v-fox-no-fa98-0084911-s-nov-3-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3345879",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-11-03",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "maryann fox v. larry craig fox us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3345879 maryann fox v. larry craig fox qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/maryann-fox-v-larry-craig-fox-3341394"
    },
    {
      "slug": "maureen-j-khan-lacoss-v-david-b-lacoss-3329771",
      "title": "Maureen J. Khan-Lacoss v. David B. Lacoss",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Maureen J. Khan-Lacoss v. David B. Lacoss",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3334267/khan-lacoss-v-lacoss-no-0541915-oct-2-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3334267",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-10-02",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "maureen j. khan-lacoss v. david b. lacoss us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3334267 maureen j. khan-lacoss v. david b. lacoss qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/maureen-j-khan-lacoss-v-david-b-lacoss-3329771"
    },
    {
      "slug": "maureen-mormile-v-vincent-mormile-3332418",
      "title": "Maureen Mormile v. Vincent Mormile.",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Maureen Mormile v. Vincent Mormile.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3336913/mormile-v-mormile-no-fa99-033-48-24-s-aug-25-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3336913",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-08-25",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "maureen mormile v. vincent mormile. domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3336913 domestic relations order maureen mormile v. vincent mormile. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/maureen-mormile-v-vincent-mormile-3332418"
    },
    {
      "slug": "melissa-koskelowski-v-john-koskelowski-3356782",
      "title": "Melissa Koskelowski v. John Koskelowski",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Melissa Koskelowski v. John Koskelowski",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3361248/koskelowski-v-koskelowski-no-fa97-0143222s-dec-7-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3361248",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-12-07",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "melissa koskelowski v. john koskelowski us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3361248 melissa koskelowski v. john koskelowski qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/melissa-koskelowski-v-john-koskelowski-3356782"
    },
    {
      "slug": "michael-d-agostino-v-jan-wise-3335589",
      "title": "Michael D'Agostino v. Jan Wise.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Michael D'Agostino v. Jan Wise.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3340078/dagostino-v-wise-no-fa00-0159283s-jun-4-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3340078",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-06-04",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "michael d'agostino v. jan wise. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3340078 michael d'agostino v. jan wise. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/michael-d-agostino-v-jan-wise-3335589"
    },
    {
      "slug": "michael-l-gehrt-v-tammy-l-gehrt-3353140",
      "title": "Michael L. Gehrt v. Tammy L. Gehrt",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Michael L. Gehrt v. Tammy L. Gehrt",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3357609/gehrt-v-gehrt-no-74801-dec-8-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3357609",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-12-08",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "michael l. gehrt v. tammy l. gehrt us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3357609 michael l. gehrt v. tammy l. gehrt qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/michael-l-gehrt-v-tammy-l-gehrt-3353140"
    },
    {
      "slug": "michael-taylor-v-ellen-taylor-3360698",
      "title": "Michael Taylor v. Ellen Taylor",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Michael Taylor v. Ellen Taylor",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3365162/taylor-v-taylor-no-fa98-0062847s-feb-23-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3365162",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-02-23",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "michael taylor v. ellen taylor us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3365162 michael taylor v. ellen taylor qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/michael-taylor-v-ellen-taylor-3360698"
    },
    {
      "slug": "mollie-loguercio-v-paul-loguercio-3363811",
      "title": "Mollie Loguercio v. Paul Loguercio",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Mollie Loguercio v. Paul Loguercio",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3368271/loguercio-v-loguercio-no-fa94-0139606-s-dec-19-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3368271",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-12-19",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "mollie loguercio v. paul loguercio domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3368271 domestic relations order mollie loguercio v. paul loguercio qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/mollie-loguercio-v-paul-loguercio-3363811"
    },
    {
      "slug": "nancy-a-geronimo-v-roger-j-geronimo-3330242",
      "title": "Nancy A. Geronimo v. Roger J. Geronimo.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Nancy A. Geronimo v. Roger J. Geronimo.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3334738/geronimo-v-geronimo-no-fa99-0154242-s-nov-7-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3334738",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-11-07",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "nancy a. geronimo v. roger j. geronimo. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3334738 nancy a. geronimo v. roger j. geronimo. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/nancy-a-geronimo-v-roger-j-geronimo-3330242"
    },
    {
      "slug": "nancy-hooge-v-mark-e-hooge-3360328",
      "title": "Nancy Hooge v. Mark E. Hooge.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Nancy Hooge v. Mark E. Hooge.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3364793/hooge-v-hooge-no-fa-99-0720338-oct-26-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3364793",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-10-26",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "nancy hooge v. mark e. hooge. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3364793 nancy hooge v. mark e. hooge. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/nancy-hooge-v-mark-e-hooge-3360328"
    },
    {
      "slug": "naomi-carpenter-v-vernon-carpenter-3367524",
      "title": "Naomi Carpenter v. Vernon Carpenter",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Naomi Carpenter v. Vernon Carpenter",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3371984/carpenter-v-carpenter-no-289742-apr-29-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3371984",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-04-29",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "naomi carpenter v. vernon carpenter us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3371984 naomi carpenter v. vernon carpenter qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/naomi-carpenter-v-vernon-carpenter-3367524"
    },
    {
      "slug": "natalia-zastawsky-v-roman-zastawsky-3365732",
      "title": "Natalia Zastawsky v. Roman Zastawsky.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Natalia Zastawsky v. Roman Zastawsky.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3370192/zastawsky-v-zastawsky-no-fa-99-0722170-oct-26-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3370192",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-10-26",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "natalia zastawsky v. roman zastawsky. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3370192 natalia zastawsky v. roman zastawsky. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/natalia-zastawsky-v-roman-zastawsky-3365732"
    },
    {
      "slug": "norma-a-morris-v-ian-g-morris-3368781",
      "title": "Norma A. Morris v. Ian G. Morris.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Norma A. Morris v. Ian G. Morris.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3373240/morris-v-morris-no-fa-99-0720358-s-aug-28-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3373240",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-08-28",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "norma a. morris v. ian g. morris. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3373240 norma a. morris v. ian g. morris. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/norma-a-morris-v-ian-g-morris-3368781"
    },
    {
      "slug": "pamela-j-reynolds-v-george-w-reynolds-3338597",
      "title": "Pamela J. Reynolds v. George W. Reynolds.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Pamela J. Reynolds v. George W. Reynolds.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3343083/reynolds-v-reynolds-no-fa89-0103324-s-mar-12-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3343083",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-03-12",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "pamela j. reynolds v. george w. reynolds. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3343083 pamela j. reynolds v. george w. reynolds. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/pamela-j-reynolds-v-george-w-reynolds-3338597"
    },
    {
      "slug": "pamela-mckane-v-paul-mckane-3363837",
      "title": "Pamela McKane v. Paul McKane",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Pamela McKane v. Paul McKane",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3368297/mckane-v-mckane-no-fa97-0060211s-aug-7-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3368297",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-08-07",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "pamela mckane v. paul mckane us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3368297 pamela mckane v. paul mckane qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/pamela-mckane-v-paul-mckane-3363837"
    },
    {
      "slug": "patricia-a-krafick-v-john-h-krafick-3338909",
      "title": "Patricia A. Krafick v. John H. Krafick",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Patricia A. Krafick v. John H. Krafick",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3343395/krafick-v-krafick-no-fa-91-0306820s-nov-19-1992/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3343395",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1992-11-19",
      "citation_year": 1992,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "patricia a. krafick v. john h. krafick us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3343395 patricia a. krafick v. john h. krafick qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/patricia-a-krafick-v-john-h-krafick-3338909"
    },
    {
      "slug": "patricia-a-morgan-v-c-robert-morgan-3341901",
      "title": "Patricia A. Morgan v. C. Robert Morgan",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Patricia A. Morgan v. C. Robert Morgan",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3346385/morgan-v-morgan-no-fa95-0149495-oct-14-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3346385",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-10-14",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "patricia a. morgan v. c. robert morgan us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3346385 patricia a. morgan v. c. robert morgan qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/patricia-a-morgan-v-c-robert-morgan-3341901"
    },
    {
      "slug": "patricia-blue-v-ernest-l-blue-3341071",
      "title": "Patricia Blue v. Ernest L. Blue",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Patricia Blue v. Ernest L. Blue",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3345556/blue-v-blue-no-111756-jul-12-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3345556",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-07-12",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "patricia blue v. ernest l. blue us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3345556 patricia blue v. ernest l. blue qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/patricia-blue-v-ernest-l-blue-3341071"
    },
    {
      "slug": "patricia-carver-v-eric-carver-3327999",
      "title": "Patricia Carver v. Eric Carver.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Patricia Carver v. Eric Carver.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3332499/carver-v-carver-no-fa000438667-oct-2-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3332499",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-10-02",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "patricia carver v. eric carver. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3332499 patricia carver v. eric carver. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/patricia-carver-v-eric-carver-3327999"
    },
    {
      "slug": "patricia-keating-durbrow-v-bruce-c-durbrow-3346779",
      "title": "Patricia Keating Durbrow v. Bruce C. Durbrow",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Patricia Keating Durbrow v. Bruce C. Durbrow",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3351257/durbrow-v-durbrow-no-fa-93-0063526-apr-28-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3351257",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-04-28",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "patricia keating durbrow v. bruce c. durbrow us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3351257 patricia keating durbrow v. bruce c. durbrow qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/patricia-keating-durbrow-v-bruce-c-durbrow-3346779"
    },
    {
      "slug": "patricia-mainville-v-raymond-e-mainville-3361600",
      "title": "Patricia Mainville v. Raymond E. Mainville",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Patricia Mainville v. Raymond E. Mainville",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3366063/mainville-v-mainville-no-fa96-0251375s-dec-4-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3366063",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-12-04",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "patricia mainville v. raymond e. mainville us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3366063 patricia mainville v. raymond e. mainville qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/patricia-mainville-v-raymond-e-mainville-3361600"
    },
    {
      "slug": "patricia-vozzi-v-john-vozzi-3351871",
      "title": "Patricia Vozzi v. John Vozzi",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Patricia Vozzi v. John Vozzi",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3356341/vozzi-v-vozzi-no-30-39-87-apr-25-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3356341",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-04-25",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "patricia vozzi v. john vozzi us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3356341 patricia vozzi v. john vozzi qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/patricia-vozzi-v-john-vozzi-3351871"
    },
    {
      "slug": "patrick-f-cox-v-maureen-cox-3330902",
      "title": "Patrick F. Cox v. Maureen Cox",
      "citation": "659 So. 2d 1051",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Patrick F. Cox v. Maureen Cox",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "659 So. 2d 1051",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3335398/cox-v-cox-no-fa-93-0062444-jan-25-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3335398",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-01-25",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "patrick f. cox v. maureen cox 659 so. 2d 1051 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3335398 659 so. 2d 1051 patrick f. cox v. maureen cox qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/patrick-f-cox-v-maureen-cox-3330902"
    },
    {
      "slug": "paula-m-spino-v-anthony-j-spino-3345290",
      "title": "Paula M. Spino v. Anthony J. Spino",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Paula M. Spino v. Anthony J. Spino",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3349769/spino-v-spino-no-fa97-0138061-mar-27-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3349769",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-03-27",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "paula m. spino v. anthony j. spino us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3349769 paula m. spino v. anthony j. spino qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/paula-m-spino-v-anthony-j-spino-3345290"
    },
    {
      "slug": "peggy-j-westfall-v-robert-m-westfall-3342300",
      "title": "Peggy J. Westfall v. Robert M. Westfall",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Peggy J. Westfall v. Robert M. Westfall",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3346784/westfall-v-westfall-no-fa-92-0060603-s-dec-9-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3346784",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-12-09",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "peggy j. westfall v. robert m. westfall us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3346784 peggy j. westfall v. robert m. westfall qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/peggy-j-westfall-v-robert-m-westfall-3342300"
    },
    {
      "slug": "perreira-v-perreira-ica-mem-op-filed-01-31-2025-ada-155-haw-296-consolidated-with-caap-20",
      "title": "Perreira v. Perreira. ICA mem. op., filed 01/31/2025 [ada], 155 Haw. 296. Consolidated with CAAP-20-0000038. Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 03/01/2025. S.Ct. Order Dismissing Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 03/07/2025 [ada]. Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 03/21/2025. S.Ct. Order Accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 05/02/2025 [ada].",
      "citation": "SCWC-20-0000038-haw",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Perreira v. Perreira. ICA mem. op., filed 01/31/2025 [ada], 155 Haw. 296. Consolidated with CAAP-20-0000038. Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 03/01/2025. S.Ct. Order Dismissing Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 03/07/2025 [ada]. Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 03/21/2025. S.Ct. Order Accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 05/02/2025 [ada].",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "SCWC-20-0000038-haw",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10671786/perreira-v-perreira-ica-mem-op-filed-01312025-ada-155-haw-296/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "10671786",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2025-09-15",
      "citation_year": 2025,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "perreira v. perreira. ica mem. op., filed 01/31/2025 [ada], 155 haw. 296. consolidated with caap-20-0000038. application for writ of certiorari, filed 03/01/2025. s.ct. order dismissing application for writ of certiorari, filed 03/07/2025 [ada]. application for writ of certiorari, filed 03/21/2025. s.ct. order accepting application for writ of certiorari, filed 05/02/2025 [ada]. scwc-20-0000038-haw us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 10671786 scwc-20-0000038-haw perreira v. perreira. ica mem. op., filed 01/31/2025 [ada], 155 haw. 296. consolidated with caap-20-0000038. application for writ of certiorari, filed 03/01/2025. s.ct. order dismissing application for writ of certiorari, filed 03/07/2025 [ada]. application for writ of certiorari, filed 03/21/2025. s.ct. order accepting application for writ of certiorari, filed 05/02/2025 [ada]. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension post_judgment_enforcement alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/perreira-v-perreira-ica-mem-op-filed-01-31-2025-ada-155-haw-296-consolidated-with-caap-20"
    },
    {
      "slug": "peter-e-meyer-v-martha-meyer-3335315",
      "title": "Peter E. Meyer v. Martha Meyer",
      "citation": "DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Peter E. Meyer v. Martha Meyer",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3339805/meyer-v-meyer-no-fa-91-0306544s-jan-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3339805",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-01-05",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "peter e. meyer v. martha meyer domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3339805 domestic relations order peter e. meyer v. martha meyer qualified_domestic_relations_order alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/peter-e-meyer-v-martha-meyer-3335315"
    },
    {
      "slug": "peter-j-farrell-v-arleen-f-farrell-3341069",
      "title": "Peter J. Farrell v. Arleen F. Farrell",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Peter J. Farrell v. Arleen F. Farrell",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3345554/farrell-v-farrell-no-fa-91-0306538s-jan-26-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3345554",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-01-26",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "peter j. farrell v. arleen f. farrell us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3345554 peter j. farrell v. arleen f. farrell qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/peter-j-farrell-v-arleen-f-farrell-3341069"
    },
    {
      "slug": "peter-s-buttress-v-alexine-j-buttress-3363146",
      "title": "Peter S. Buttress v. Alexine J. Buttress",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Peter S. Buttress v. Alexine J. Buttress",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3367607/buttress-v-buttress-no-30-54-91-apr-22-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3367607",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-04-22",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "peter s. buttress v. alexine j. buttress us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3367607 peter s. buttress v. alexine j. buttress qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/peter-s-buttress-v-alexine-j-buttress-3363146"
    },
    {
      "slug": "philip-wax-v-angela-wax-3369471",
      "title": "Philip Wax v. Angela Wax",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Philip Wax v. Angela Wax",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3373930/wax-v-wax-no-fa97-0160429-s-jan-7-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3373930",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-01-07",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "philip wax v. angela wax us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3373930 philip wax v. angela wax qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/philip-wax-v-angela-wax-3369471"
    },
    {
      "slug": "rae-del-grosso-v-charles-del-grosso-3365664",
      "title": "Rae Del Grosso v. Charles Del Grosso",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Rae Del Grosso v. Charles Del Grosso",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3370124/del-grosso-v-del-grosso-no-52-25-76-aug-11-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3370124",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-08-11",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "rae del grosso v. charles del grosso us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3370124 rae del grosso v. charles del grosso qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/rae-del-grosso-v-charles-del-grosso-3365664"
    },
    {
      "slug": "ramona-gonzalez-v-guillermo-gonzalez-3326749",
      "title": "Ramona Gonzalez v. Guillermo Gonzalez",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Ramona Gonzalez v. Guillermo Gonzalez",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3331249/gonzalez-v-gonzalez-no-fa95-0249717-apr-22-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3331249",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-04-22",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "ramona gonzalez v. guillermo gonzalez us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3331249 ramona gonzalez v. guillermo gonzalez qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/ramona-gonzalez-v-guillermo-gonzalez-3326749"
    },
    {
      "slug": "renate-downing-v-kenneth-e-downing-3328807",
      "title": "Renate Downing v. Kenneth E. Downing",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Renate Downing v. Kenneth E. Downing",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3333304/downing-v-downing-no-fa98-033-25-98-s-oct-12-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3333304",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-10-12",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "renate downing v. kenneth e. downing us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3333304 renate downing v. kenneth e. downing qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/renate-downing-v-kenneth-e-downing-3328807"
    },
    {
      "slug": "rene-l-sylvestre-v-jean-m-sylvestre-3371768",
      "title": "Rene L. Sylvestre v. Jean M. Sylvestre",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Rene L. Sylvestre v. Jean M. Sylvestre",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3376224/sylvestre-v-sylvestre-no-108787-sep-5-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3376224",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-09-05",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "rene l. sylvestre v. jean m. sylvestre us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3376224 rene l. sylvestre v. jean m. sylvestre qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/rene-l-sylvestre-v-jean-m-sylvestre-3371768"
    },
    {
      "slug": "richard-hauser-v-kathleen-hauser-3357608",
      "title": "Richard Hauser v. Kathleen Hauser.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Richard Hauser v. Kathleen Hauser.",
      "extracted_docket_number": "FA-00-0559616S SUPERIOR",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3362074/hauser-v-hauser-no-fa-0559616s-jul-9-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3362074",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-07-09",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "richard hauser v. kathleen hauser. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3362074 fa-00-0559616s superior richard hauser v. kathleen hauser. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/richard-hauser-v-kathleen-hauser-3357608"
    },
    {
      "slug": "richard-lafaille-v-joan-lafaille-3336961",
      "title": "Richard Lafaille v. Joan Lafaille",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Richard Lafaille v. Joan Lafaille",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3341448/lafaille-v-lafaille-no-536315-sep-6-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3341448",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-09-06",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "richard lafaille v. joan lafaille us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3341448 richard lafaille v. joan lafaille qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/richard-lafaille-v-joan-lafaille-3336961"
    },
    {
      "slug": "richard-pettit-v-eileen-pettit-3342991",
      "title": "Richard Pettit v. Eileen Pettit",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Richard Pettit v. Eileen Pettit",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3347475/pettit-v-pettit-no-51-35-73-apr-23-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3347475",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-04-23",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "richard pettit v. eileen pettit us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3347475 richard pettit v. eileen pettit qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/richard-pettit-v-eileen-pettit-3342991"
    },
    {
      "slug": "richard-ritchie-jr-v-barbara-j-ritchie-3361517",
      "title": "Richard Ritchie, Jr. v. Barbara J. Ritchie.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Richard Ritchie, Jr. v. Barbara J. Ritchie.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3365980/ritchie-v-ritchie-no-fa-99-0721109-may-25-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3365980",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-05-25",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "richard ritchie, jr. v. barbara j. ritchie. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3365980 richard ritchie, jr. v. barbara j. ritchie. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/richard-ritchie-jr-v-barbara-j-ritchie-3361517"
    },
    {
      "slug": "robert-j-jolly-v-joyce-m-barcley-3363595",
      "title": "Robert J. Jolly v. Joyce M. Barcley.",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Robert J. Jolly v. Joyce M. Barcley.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3368055/jolly-v-barcley-no-fa01-0074568-s-oct-10-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3368055",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-10-10",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "robert j. jolly v. joyce m. barcley. domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3368055 domestic relations order robert j. jolly v. joyce m. barcley. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/robert-j-jolly-v-joyce-m-barcley-3363595"
    },
    {
      "slug": "robert-m-heslin-v-roberta-m-heslin-3341999",
      "title": "Robert M. Heslin v. Roberta M. Heslin.",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Robert M. Heslin v. Roberta M. Heslin.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3346483/heslin-v-heslin-no-fa-01-0726580s-sep-14-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3346483",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-09-14",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "robert m. heslin v. roberta m. heslin. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3346483 robert m. heslin v. roberta m. heslin. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/robert-m-heslin-v-roberta-m-heslin-3341999"
    },
    {
      "slug": "robert-m-sigafose-v-arlene-diaz-sigafose-3347470",
      "title": "Robert M. Sigafose v. Arlene Diaz Sigafose",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Robert M. Sigafose v. Arlene Diaz Sigafose",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3351947/sigafose-v-sigafose-no-fa-98-0065986-jan-7-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3351947",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-01-07",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "robert m. sigafose v. arlene diaz sigafose us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3351947 robert m. sigafose v. arlene diaz sigafose qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/robert-m-sigafose-v-arlene-diaz-sigafose-3347470"
    },
    {
      "slug": "robert-summers-v-karen-summers-3342691",
      "title": "Robert Summers v. Karen Summers",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Robert Summers v. Karen Summers",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3347175/summers-v-summers-no-fa92-0121425-s-dec-22-1992/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3347175",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1992-12-22",
      "citation_year": 1992,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "robert summers v. karen summers us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3347175 robert summers v. karen summers qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/robert-summers-v-karen-summers-3342691"
    },
    {
      "slug": "roberta-d-stamp-v-anthony-j-visconti-3337898",
      "title": "Roberta D. Stamp v. Anthony J. Visconti",
      "citation": "qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Roberta D. Stamp v. Anthony J. Visconti",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3342384/stamp-v-visconti-no-fa-96-60422-s-sep-15-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3342384",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-09-15",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "roberta d. stamp v. anthony j. visconti us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3342384 roberta d. stamp v. anthony j. visconti qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/roberta-d-stamp-v-anthony-j-visconti-3337898"
    },
    {
      "slug": "roger-h-gosselin-v-maureen-e-gosselin-3339841",
      "title": "Roger H. Gosselin v. Maureen E. Gosselin.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Roger H. Gosselin v. Maureen E. Gosselin.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3344326/gosselin-v-gosselin-no-0117793-jun-20-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3344326",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-06-20",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "roger h. gosselin v. maureen e. gosselin. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3344326 roger h. gosselin v. maureen e. gosselin. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/roger-h-gosselin-v-maureen-e-gosselin-3339841"
    },
    {
      "slug": "rosemarie-rybczyk-v-joseph-rybczyk-3346927",
      "title": "Rosemarie Rybczyk v. Joseph Rybczyk",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Rosemarie Rybczyk v. Joseph Rybczyk",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3351405/rybczyk-v-rybczyk-no-70292-nov-2-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3351405",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-11-02",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "rosemarie rybczyk v. joseph rybczyk us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3351405 rosemarie rybczyk v. joseph rybczyk qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/rosemarie-rybczyk-v-joseph-rybczyk-3346927"
    },
    {
      "slug": "rosemary-maciog-v-michael-maciog-3355669",
      "title": "Rosemary MacIog v. Michael MacIog",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Rosemary MacIog v. Michael MacIog",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3360136/maciog-v-maciog-no-fa98006-42-17-sep-8-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3360136",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-09-08",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "rosemary maciog v. michael maciog us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3360136 rosemary maciog v. michael maciog qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/rosemary-maciog-v-michael-maciog-3355669"
    },
    {
      "slug": "rosemary-yarhouse-v-herbert-l-yarhouse-jr-3346702",
      "title": "Rosemary Yarhouse v. Herbert L. Yarhouse, Jr.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Rosemary Yarhouse v. Herbert L. Yarhouse, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3351180/yarhouse-v-yarhouse-no-0539821-jun-26-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3351180",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-06-26",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "rosemary yarhouse v. herbert l. yarhouse, jr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3351180 rosemary yarhouse v. herbert l. yarhouse, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/rosemary-yarhouse-v-herbert-l-yarhouse-jr-3346702"
    },
    {
      "slug": "ruth-polaco-v-jorge-polaco-3354261",
      "title": "Ruth Polaco v. Jorge Polaco",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Ruth Polaco v. Jorge Polaco",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3358729/polaco-v-polaco-no-fa95-0129767-may-15-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3358729",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-05-15",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "ruth polaco v. jorge polaco us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3358729 ruth polaco v. jorge polaco qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/ruth-polaco-v-jorge-polaco-3354261"
    },
    {
      "slug": "sally-pagano-v-frederick-a-pagano-jr-3335166",
      "title": "Sally Pagano v. Frederick A. Pagano, Jr.",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Sally Pagano v. Frederick A. Pagano, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3339656/pagano-v-pagano-no-fa95-04-97-95-mar-21-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3339656",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-03-21",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "sally pagano v. frederick a. pagano, jr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3339656 sally pagano v. frederick a. pagano, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension public_employee_retirement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/sally-pagano-v-frederick-a-pagano-jr-3335166"
    },
    {
      "slug": "samuel-robert-kowal-v-lynn-elaine-kowal-3353592",
      "title": "Samuel Robert Kowal v. Lynn Elaine Kowal",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Samuel Robert Kowal v. Lynn Elaine Kowal",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3358060/kowal-v-kowal-no-fa93-04-44-37s-nov-7-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3358060",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-11-07",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "samuel robert kowal v. lynn elaine kowal us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3358060 samuel robert kowal v. lynn elaine kowal qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/samuel-robert-kowal-v-lynn-elaine-kowal-3353592"
    },
    {
      "slug": "sandra-stern-v-steven-stern-3331288",
      "title": "Sandra Stern v. Steven Stern.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Sandra Stern v. Steven Stern.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3335784/stern-v-stern-no-fa-000338962-aug-13-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3335784",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-08-13",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "sandra stern v. steven stern. us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3335784 sandra stern v. steven stern. qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/sandra-stern-v-steven-stern-3331288"
    },
    {
      "slug": "sarah-cagninelli-v-giovan-caginelli-3357552",
      "title": "Sarah Cagninelli v. Giovan Caginelli",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Sarah Cagninelli v. Giovan Caginelli",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3362018/caginelli-v-caginelli-no-fa92-0127196-s-nov-1-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3362018",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-11-01",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "sarah cagninelli v. giovan caginelli us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3362018 sarah cagninelli v. giovan caginelli qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/sarah-cagninelli-v-giovan-caginelli-3357552"
    },
    {
      "slug": "sharon-a-d-andrea-v-nicholas-d-andrea-3344253",
      "title": "Sharon a D'Andrea v. Nicholas D'andrea.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Sharon a D'Andrea v. Nicholas D'andrea.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3348735/dandrea-v-dandrea-no-fa01-66725s-oct-28-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3348735",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-10-28",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "sharon a d'andrea v. nicholas d'andrea. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3348735 sharon a d'andrea v. nicholas d'andrea. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/sharon-a-d-andrea-v-nicholas-d-andrea-3344253"
    },
    {
      "slug": "sharon-koepfli-v-kenneth-koepfli-3351168",
      "title": "Sharon Koepfli v. Kenneth Koepfli.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Sharon Koepfli v. Kenneth Koepfli.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3355641/koepfli-v-koepfli-no-fa99-0066268s-jul-17-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3355641",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-07-17",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "sharon koepfli v. kenneth koepfli. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3355641 sharon koepfli v. kenneth koepfli. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/sharon-koepfli-v-kenneth-koepfli-3351168"
    },
    {
      "slug": "sharon-laska-v-less-laska-3334194",
      "title": "Sharon Laska v. Less Laska",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Sharon Laska v. Less Laska",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3338687/laska-v-laska-no-fa95-0146535-s-mar-22-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3338687",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-03-22",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "sharon laska v. less laska us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3338687 sharon laska v. less laska qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/sharon-laska-v-less-laska-3334194"
    },
    {
      "slug": "sharon-layte-v-john-layte-3327689",
      "title": "Sharon Layte v. John Layte",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Sharon Layte v. John Layte",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3332189/layte-v-layte-no-fa-98-84414-sep-14-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3332189",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-09-14",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "sharon layte v. john layte us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3332189 sharon layte v. john layte qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/sharon-layte-v-john-layte-3327689"
    },
    {
      "slug": "shirley-ann-rininger-v-eugene-paul-rininger-3693900",
      "title": "Shirley Ann Rininger v. Eugene Paul Rininger",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Shirley Ann Rininger v. Eugene Paul Rininger",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 THE LOWER",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3945601/rininger-v-rininger-unpublished-decision-7-24-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3945601",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-07-24",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "shirley ann rininger v. eugene paul rininger us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3945601 1 the lower shirley ann rininger v. eugene paul rininger qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/shirley-ann-rininger-v-eugene-paul-rininger-3693900"
    },
    {
      "slug": "shirley-e-mcgrath-v-john-mcgrath-3327419",
      "title": "Shirley E. McGrath v. John McGrath",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Shirley E. McGrath v. John McGrath",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3331918/mcgrath-v-mcgrath-no-534240s-dec-12-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3331918",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-12-12",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "shirley e. mcgrath v. john mcgrath us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3331918 shirley e. mcgrath v. john mcgrath qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/shirley-e-mcgrath-v-john-mcgrath-3327419"
    },
    {
      "slug": "silverbrook-ii-llc-v-water-pollution-control-authority-of-the-town-of-orange-3344053",
      "title": "Silverbrook II LLC v. Water Pollution Control Authority of the Town of Orange",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Silverbrook II LLC v. Water Pollution Control Authority of the Town of Orange",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3348535/silverbrook-ii-v-wpca-town-of-orange-no-fa96-134763s-dec-27-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3348535",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-12-27",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "silverbrook ii llc v. water pollution control authority of the town of orange us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3348535 silverbrook ii llc v. water pollution control authority of the town of orange qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/silverbrook-ii-llc-v-water-pollution-control-authority-of-the-town-of-orange-3344053"
    },
    {
      "slug": "stanislaw-czaplicki-v-eufemia-czaplicki-3343743",
      "title": "Stanislaw Czaplicki v. Eufemia Czaplicki",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Stanislaw Czaplicki v. Eufemia Czaplicki",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3348226/czaplicki-v-czaplicki-no-fa-95-0465213-s-jan-22-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3348226",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-01-22",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "stanislaw czaplicki v. eufemia czaplicki us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3348226 stanislaw czaplicki v. eufemia czaplicki qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/stanislaw-czaplicki-v-eufemia-czaplicki-3343743"
    },
    {
      "slug": "susan-h-fricke-v-noel-e-fricke-3331289",
      "title": "Susan H. Fricke v. Noel E. Fricke.",
      "citation": "QUALIFIED DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Susan H. Fricke v. Noel E. Fricke.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3335785/fricke-v-fricke-no-fa-89-0367764-s-feb-22-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3335785",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-02-22",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "susan h. fricke v. noel e. fricke. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3335785 susan h. fricke v. noel e. fricke. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/susan-h-fricke-v-noel-e-fricke-3331289"
    },
    {
      "slug": "suzanne-a-murphy-v-robert-j-murphy-3357650",
      "title": "Suzanne A. Murphy v. Robert J. Murphy",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Suzanne A. Murphy v. Robert J. Murphy",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 is awarded to the defendant. B",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3362116/murphy-v-murphy-no-fa98-0331962-s-feb-2-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3362116",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-02-02",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "suzanne a. murphy v. robert j. murphy us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3362116 1 is awarded to the defendant. b suzanne a. murphy v. robert j. murphy qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/suzanne-a-murphy-v-robert-j-murphy-3357650"
    },
    {
      "slug": "teresa-m-drew-v-steven-r-drew-3354552",
      "title": "Teresa M. Drew v. Steven R. Drew.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Teresa M. Drew v. Steven R. Drew.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3359020/drew-v-drew-no-fa-01-0181713-s-jan-23-2002/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3359020",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2002-01-23",
      "citation_year": 2002,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "teresa m. drew v. steven r. drew. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3359020 teresa m. drew v. steven r. drew. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/teresa-m-drew-v-steven-r-drew-3354552"
    },
    {
      "slug": "teresa-situ-v-hector-d-situ-3344150",
      "title": "Teresa Situ v. Hector D. Situ",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Teresa Situ v. Hector D. Situ",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3348632/situ-v-situ-no-32-40-30-oct-30-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3348632",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-10-30",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "teresa situ v. hector d. situ us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3348632 teresa situ v. hector d. situ qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/teresa-situ-v-hector-d-situ-3344150"
    },
    {
      "slug": "terry-a-barrett-v-penelope-h-barrett-3357896",
      "title": "Terry A. Barrett v. Penelope H. Barrett",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Terry A. Barrett v. Penelope H. Barrett",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3362361/barrett-v-barrett-no-30-15-52-may-22-1992/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3362361",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1992-05-22",
      "citation_year": 1992,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "terry a. barrett v. penelope h. barrett us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3362361 terry a. barrett v. penelope h. barrett qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/terry-a-barrett-v-penelope-h-barrett-3357896"
    },
    {
      "slug": "thomas-f-morrison-iii-v-sharon-morrison-3330672",
      "title": "Thomas F. Morrison, III v. Sharon Morrison",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Thomas F. Morrison, III v. Sharon Morrison",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3335168/morrison-v-morrison-no-fa96-0149899-s-apr-2-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3335168",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-04-02",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "thomas f. morrison, iii v. sharon morrison us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3335168 thomas f. morrison, iii v. sharon morrison qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/thomas-f-morrison-iii-v-sharon-morrison-3330672"
    },
    {
      "slug": "timothy-silvis-v-marlene-silvis-3335653",
      "title": "Timothy Silvis v. Marlene Silvis.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Timothy Silvis v. Marlene Silvis.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3340142/silvis-v-silvis-no-fa98-67912-s-jul-11-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3340142",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-07-11",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "timothy silvis v. marlene silvis. us erisa / defined contribution issues courtlistener.com 3340142 timothy silvis v. marlene silvis. qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/timothy-silvis-v-marlene-silvis-3335653"
    },
    {
      "slug": "tonya-durnall-v-willard-h-durnall-sr-3333326",
      "title": "Tonya Durnall v. Willard H. Durnall, Sr.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Tonya Durnall v. Willard H. Durnall, Sr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3337821/durnall-v-durnall-no-108812-sep-11-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3337821",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-09-11",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "tonya durnall v. willard h. durnall, sr. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3337821 tonya durnall v. willard h. durnall, sr. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/tonya-durnall-v-willard-h-durnall-sr-3333326"
    },
    {
      "slug": "victoria-sicilian-v-john-a-sicilian-3340873",
      "title": "Victoria Sicilian v. John A. Sicilian.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Victoria Sicilian v. John A. Sicilian.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3345358/sicilian-v-sicilian-no-fa-99-0359679-apr-20-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3345358",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-04-20",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "victoria sicilian v. john a. sicilian. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3345358 victoria sicilian v. john a. sicilian. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/victoria-sicilian-v-john-a-sicilian-3340873"
    },
    {
      "slug": "wayne-steward-v-beverly-steward-3341932",
      "title": "Wayne Steward v. Beverly Steward",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Wayne Steward v. Beverly Steward",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3346416/steward-v-steward-no-fa-70157-s-mar-16-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3346416",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-03-16",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "wayne steward v. beverly steward us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3346416 wayne steward v. beverly steward qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/wayne-steward-v-beverly-steward-3341932"
    },
    {
      "slug": "william-d-shaffer-v-macy-w-shaffer-3325777",
      "title": "William D. Shaffer v. MacY W. Shaffer",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "William D. Shaffer v. MacY W. Shaffer",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3330279/shaffer-v-shaffer-no-531887-jul-11-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3330279",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-07-11",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "william d. shaffer v. macy w. shaffer us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3330279 william d. shaffer v. macy w. shaffer qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/william-d-shaffer-v-macy-w-shaffer-3325777"
    },
    {
      "slug": "william-e-armshaw-v-stephanie-armshaw-3327115",
      "title": "William E. Armshaw v. Stephanie Armshaw",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "William E. Armshaw v. Stephanie Armshaw",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3331614/armshaw-v-armshaw-no-fa94-04-66-12-jan-24-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3331614",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-01-24",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "william e. armshaw v. stephanie armshaw us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3331614 william e. armshaw v. stephanie armshaw qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/william-e-armshaw-v-stephanie-armshaw-3327115"
    },
    {
      "slug": "william-f-buonocore-v-marion-g-buonocore-3369732",
      "title": "William F. Buonocore v. Marion G. Buonocore",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "William F. Buonocore v. Marion G. Buonocore",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3374191/buonocore-v-buonocore-no-0903629-jun-10-1993/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3374191",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1993-06-10",
      "citation_year": 1993,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "william f. buonocore v. marion g. buonocore us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3374191 william f. buonocore v. marion g. buonocore qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/william-f-buonocore-v-marion-g-buonocore-3369732"
    },
    {
      "slug": "william-j-barss-v-colleen-a-barss-3366391",
      "title": "William J. Barss v. Colleen A. Barss",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "William J. Barss v. Colleen A. Barss",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3370851/barss-v-barss-no-103585-apr-28-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3370851",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-04-28",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "william j. barss v. colleen a. barss us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3370851 william j. barss v. colleen a. barss qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/william-j-barss-v-colleen-a-barss-3366391"
    },
    {
      "slug": "william-storey-v-suzanne-storey-3334354",
      "title": "William Storey v. Suzanne Storey.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "William Storey v. Suzanne Storey.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3338847/storey-v-storey-no-0116939-sep-25-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3338847",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-09-25",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 15,
      "search_terms": "william storey v. suzanne storey. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3338847 william storey v. suzanne storey. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/william-storey-v-suzanne-storey-3334354"
    },
    {
      "slug": "conner-c-v-holtzinger-conner-k-4426988",
      "title": "Conner, C. v. Holtzinger Conner, K.",
      "citation": "2019 Pa. Super. 251",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Conner, C. v. Holtzinger Conner, K.",
      "extracted_docket_number": "856 MDA 2018 CONNER",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2019 Pa. Super. 251",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4649735/conner-c-v-holtzinger-conner-k/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4649735",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2019-08-20",
      "citation_year": 2019,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 13,
      "search_terms": "conner, c. v. holtzinger conner, k. 2019 pa. super. 251 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 4649735 856 mda 2018 conner 2019 pa. super. 251 conner, c. v. holtzinger conner, k. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 3,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/conner-c-v-holtzinger-conner-k-4426988"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10671899-10671899",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10671899",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10671899",
      "extracted_docket_number": "121. The FCR evaluated motions to dismiss",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "alternate_payee",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 13,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10671899 1056(d)(3) us erisa / defined contribution issues 121. the fcr evaluated motions to dismiss 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k alternate_payee preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 3,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10671899-10671899"
    },
    {
      "slug": "abdul-w-mahmud-v-shireen-mahmud-3366061",
      "title": "Abdul W. Mahmud v. Shireen Mahmud",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Abdul W. Mahmud v. Shireen Mahmud",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3370521/mahmud-v-mahmud-no-fa94-0071257-s-jan-2-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3370521",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-01-02",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "abdul w. mahmud v. shireen mahmud us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3370521 abdul w. mahmud v. shireen mahmud qualified_domestic_relations_order pension beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/abdul-w-mahmud-v-shireen-mahmud-3366061"
    },
    {
      "slug": "andrew-mckenzie-v-lisa-mckenzie-3339491",
      "title": "Andrew McKenzie v. Lisa McKenzie",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Andrew McKenzie v. Lisa McKenzie",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3343976/mckenzie-v-mckenzie-no-fa90-027-66-45-s-mar-13-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3343976",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-03-13",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "andrew mckenzie v. lisa mckenzie us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3343976 andrew mckenzie v. lisa mckenzie qualified_domestic_relations_order pension post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/andrew-mckenzie-v-lisa-mckenzie-3339491"
    },
    {
      "slug": "cheryl-wall-bajda-v-stephen-t-bajda-3368361",
      "title": "Cheryl Wall Bajda v. Stephen T. Bajda",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Cheryl Wall Bajda v. Stephen T. Bajda",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3372821/bajda-v-bajda-no-32-16-85-jul-2-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3372821",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-07-02",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "cheryl wall bajda v. stephen t. bajda us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3372821 cheryl wall bajda v. stephen t. bajda qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/cheryl-wall-bajda-v-stephen-t-bajda-3368361"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10038059-10038059",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10038059",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10038059",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10038059 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10038059-10038059"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10084971-10084971",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10084971",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10084971",
      "extracted_docket_number": "JCF32230 was affirmed on direct",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10084971 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues jcf32230 was affirmed on direct domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10084971-10084971"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10086655-10086655",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10086655",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10086655",
      "extracted_docket_number": "117. Defendant Young",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "869 F.2d 1298",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10086655 us pension / defined benefit issues 117. defendant young 869 f.2d 1298 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10086655-10086655"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10180256-10180256",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10180256",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10180256",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "726 F.3d 830",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10180256 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 726 f.3d 830 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10180256-10180256"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10316845-10316845",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10316845",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10316845",
      "extracted_docket_number": "number 19-CV- 3859",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10316845 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues number 19-cv- 3859 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10316845-10316845"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10318275-10318275",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10318275",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10318275",
      "extracted_docket_number": "and note service on the docket. Plaintiff has conse",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10318275 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues and note service on the docket. plaintiff has conse domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10318275-10318275"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1042269-1042269",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1042269",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1042269",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1042269 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1042269-1042269"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1044305-1044305",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1044305",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SHARON LYNN PUCKETT v. BOBBY WAYNE PUCKETT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "38 S.W.3d 560",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1044305 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 38 s.w.3d 560 sharon lynn puckett v. bobby wayne puckett qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1044305-1044305"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10487587-10487587",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10487587",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. NATALIE THRYPHENIA COLLINS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "AG No. 8",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10487587 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues ag no. 8 domestic relations order attorney grievance commission of maryland v. natalie thryphenia collins qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10487587-10487587"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10488421-10488421",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10488421",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Heinrich",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10488421 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues in re marriage of heinrich qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10488421-10488421"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10489419-10489419",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10489419",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of JENNIFER JOHNSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-20-0068 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10489419 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2-20-0068 order domestic relations order in re marriage of jennifer johnson qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10489419-10489419"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10490636-10490636",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10490636",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Andres",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Second District No. 2-19-1146",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10490636 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues second district no. 2-19-1146 domestic relations order in re marriage of andres qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10490636-10490636"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10490947-10490947",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10490947",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Baggett",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of documents to require Christy to comply with orders of the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10490947 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues of documents to require christy to comply with orders of the in re marriage of baggett qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10490947-10490947"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10492258-10492258",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10492258",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10492258",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10492258 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10492258-10492258"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1049797-1049797",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1049797",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JESSE ROBERT ANDERSON v. CHRIS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2009-01691-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "8 S.W.3d 625",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1049797 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues m2009-01691-coa-r3-cv - 8 s.w.3d 625 jesse robert anderson v. chris qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1049797-1049797"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10506545-10506545",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10506545",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "N.A. v. N",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "671 S.W.2d 880",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10506545 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 671 s.w.2d 880 n.a. v. n qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10506545-10506545"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1051974-1051974",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1051974",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1051974",
      "extracted_docket_number": "93-212 No. E2007-00750-COA-R3-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1051974 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 93-212 no. e2007-00750-coa-r3-cv qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1051974-1051974"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1052985-1052985",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1052985",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "NANCY LEE BARLOW LONG v. BOBBY RAY LONG",
      "extracted_docket_number": "M2004-01697-COA-R3-CV -",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "907 S.W.2d 815",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1052985 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues m2004-01697-coa-r3-cv - 907 s.w.2d 815 nancy lee barlow long v. bobby ray long qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1052985-1052985"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10564994-10564994",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10564994",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10564994",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "806 S.W.2d 791",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10564994 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 806 s.w.2d 791 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10564994-10564994"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10575823-10575823",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10575823",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "V.J.H. v. C.A.B",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2017AP2474 Cir. Ct. No. 2014FA95 STATE OF WISCONSIN IN",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "442 N.W.2d 545",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10575823 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2017ap2474 cir. ct. no. 2014fa95 state of wisconsin in 442 n.w.2d 545 v.j.h. v. c.a.b qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10575823-10575823"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10595579-10595579",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10595579",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "KISHA DEAN TREZEVANT v. STANLEY H. TREZEVANT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10595579 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order kisha dean trezevant v. stanley h. trezevant qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10595579-10595579"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10600942-10600942",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10600942",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "T. S. R. v. J. B. C",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10600942 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order t. s. r. v. j. b. c qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10600942-10600942"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10601438-10601438",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10601438",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10601438",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10601438 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10601438-10601438"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10631070-10631070",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10631070",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10631070",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10631070 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10631070-10631070"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1064615-1064615",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1064615",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1064615",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1064615 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1064615-1064615"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10654083-10654083",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10654083",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10654083",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "674 F.3d 369",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10654083 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 674 f.3d 369 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10654083-10654083"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10654158-10654158",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10654158",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10654158",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "674 F.3d 369",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10654158 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 674 f.3d 369 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10654158-10654158"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1065974-1065974",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1065974",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "REBECCA JANE LEW v. IRA EUGENE LEW",
      "extracted_docket_number": "12 of the Marital Dissolution Agreement as entered into and",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "732 S.W.2d 598",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1065974 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 12 of the marital dissolution agreement as entered into and 732 s.w.2d 598 rebecca jane lew v. ira eugene lew qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1065974-1065974"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10665194-10665194",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10665194",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IUE-CWA v. GMC",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "521 U.S. 591",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10665194 us erisa / defined contribution issues 521 u.s. 591 iue-cwa v. gmc qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10665194-10665194"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1066851-1066851",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1066851",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1066851",
      "extracted_docket_number": "0269-04-3 SHAHNAZ A. AHMED FROM THE CIRCUIT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "265 F. Supp. 63",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1066851 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 0269-04-3 shahnaz a. ahmed from the circuit 265 f. supp. 63 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1066851-1066851"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1066858-1066858",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1066858",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1066858",
      "extracted_docket_number": "0269-04-3 SHAHNAZ A. AHMED FROM THE CIRCUIT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "265 F. Supp. 63",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1066858 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 0269-04-3 shahnaz a. ahmed from the circuit 265 f. supp. 63 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1066858-1066858"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1067580-1067580",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1067580",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1067580",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1067580 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1067580-1067580"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1067582-1067582",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1067582",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1067582",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1067582 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1067582-1067582"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1067700-1067700",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1067700",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1067700",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1067700 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1067700-1067700"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10680823-10680823",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10680823",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10680823",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entry",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "703 F.2d 170",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10680823 us erisa / defined contribution issues entry 703 f.2d 170 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10680823-10680823"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10680862-10680862",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10680862",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10680862",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entry",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "703 F.2d 170",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10680862 us erisa / defined contribution issues entry 703 f.2d 170 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10680862-10680862"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10726178-10726178",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10726178",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10726178",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "708 F.3d 520",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10726178 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 708 f.3d 520 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10726178-10726178"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10730400-10730400",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10730400",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10730400",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "439 F.3d 198",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10730400 us pension / defined benefit issues 439 f.3d 198 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10730400-10730400"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10730596-10730596",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10730596",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10730596",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "545 U.S. 546",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10730596 us pension / defined benefit issues 545 u.s. 546 qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10730596-10730596"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1073497-1073497",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1073497",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SESSION MONA ZAYYAT KOJA v. ABED SALAM KOJA A",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "944 S.W.2d 379",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1073497 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 944 s.w.2d 379 session mona zayyat koja v. abed salam koja a qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1073497-1073497"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10746042-10746042",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10746042",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10746042",
      "extracted_docket_number": "251 MDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10746042 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 251 mda 2021 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10746042-10746042"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1075459-1075459",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1075459",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1075459",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1075459 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1075459-1075459"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10757622-10757622",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10757622",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10757622",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "650 F. Supp. 3d 259",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10757622 us pension / defined benefit issues 650 f. supp. 3d 259 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10757622-10757622"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10770632-10770632",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10770632",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Hoster",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10770632 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues in re marriage of hoster qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10770632-10770632"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1077613-1077613",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1077613",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1077613",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1077613 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1077613-1077613"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10781946-10781946",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10781946",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10781946",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3315 EDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10781946 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 3315 eda 2018 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10781946-10781946"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10782215-10782215",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10782215",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "J.P. v. J.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3292 EDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10782215 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 3292 eda 2019 domestic relations order j.p. v. j.s qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10782215-10782215"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1079647-1079647",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1079647",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1079647",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "676 S.W.2d 554",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1079647 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 676 s.w.2d 554 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1079647-1079647"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10812033-10812033",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10812033",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COMBINED ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT v. MELISSA MONTEJANO",
      "extracted_docket_number": "BCD-CV-2020-07 CUMBERLAND",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "8 A.3d 646",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10812033 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues bcd-cv-2020-07 cumberland 8 a.3d 646 combined order on motions for summary judgment v. melissa montejano qualified_domestic_relations_order beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10812033-10812033"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10815766-10815766",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10815766",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10815766",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10815766 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10815766-10815766"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-10844884-10844884",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 10844884",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 10844884",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "959 S.W.2d 615",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 10844884 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 959 s.w.2d 615 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-10844884-10844884"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1087057-1087057",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1087057",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1087057",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1087057 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1087057-1087057"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11074135-11074135",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11074135",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Heeter",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "702 P.2d 353",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11074135 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 702 p.2d 353 in re estate of heeter qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11074135-11074135"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11079415-11079415",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11079415",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11079415",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "171 So.3d 1097",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11079415 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 171 so.3d 1097 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11079415-11079415"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11081383-11081383",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11081383",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11081383",
      "extracted_docket_number": "45 Defendants. 11 12 13 Before the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "516 F.3d 1095",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "alternate_payee",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11081383 us pension / defined benefit issues 45 defendants. 11 12 13 before the 516 f.3d 1095 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension public_employee_retirement alternate_payee beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11081383-11081383"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11115616-11115616",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11115616",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11115616",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11115616 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11115616-11115616"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11124586-11124586",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11124586",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "E.A.K.M. v. M.A.M",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "417 U.S. 156",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11124586 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 417 u.s. 156 e.a.k.m. v. m.a.m qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11124586-11124586"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11125657-11125657",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11125657",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11125657",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11125657 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11125657-11125657"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11139362-11139362",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11139362",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "M.J. v. HIGHLAND COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AGENCY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11139362 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order m.j. v. highland county child support enforcement agency qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11139362-11139362"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11139373-11139373",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11139373",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "M.J. v. CLINTON COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AGENCY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11139373 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order m.j. v. clinton county child support enforcement agency qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11139373-11139373"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11140323-11140323",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11140323",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of DENNIS STACEY and MARSHA STACEY. DENNIS STACEY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "208 Cal.App.4th 1074",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11140323 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 208 cal.app.4th 1074 in re the marriage of dennis stacey and marsha stacey. dennis stacey qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11140323-11140323"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11149784-11149784",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11149784",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CUYAHOGA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. WILLIAMSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11149784 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues cuyahoga county bar association v. williamson qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11149784-11149784"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11151481-11151481",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11151481",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11151481",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11151481 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11151481-11151481"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11152995-11152995",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11152995",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. EASTERWOOD",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11152995 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues office of disciplinary counsel v. easterwood qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11152995-11152995"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11164834-11164834",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11164834",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "J.A.D. v. F.J.D",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "634 S.W.3d 653",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11164834 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 634 s.w.3d 653 j.a.d. v. f.j.d qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11164834-11164834"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11166646-11166646",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11166646",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11166646",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11166646 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11166646-11166646"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11178597-11178597",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11178597",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11178597",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18 at 2–3. Because the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11178597 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 18 at 2–3. because the domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11178597-11178597"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11181649-11181649",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11181649",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11181649",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "148 S.W.3d 124",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "ERISA / defined contribution issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11181649 us erisa / defined contribution issues 148 s.w.3d 124 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11181649-11181649"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11191111-11191111",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11191111",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11191111",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11191111 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11191111-11191111"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11192480-11192480",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11192480",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11192480",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11192480 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11192480-11192480"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11193046-11193046",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11193046",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SR. v. BRENDA PARHAM FARLEY",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11193046 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues sr. v. brenda parham farley qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11193046-11193046"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11194461-11194461",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11194461",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "DUNN v. DUNN. BROWN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11194461 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order dunn v. dunn. brown qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11194461-11194461"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11196866-11196866",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11196866",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11196866",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11196866 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11196866-11196866"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11200756-11200756",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11200756",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "K.T. v. E.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "89 Cal.App.5th 574",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11200756 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 89 cal.app.5th 574 k.t. v. e.s qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11200756-11200756"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11202666-11202666",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11202666",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11202666",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24CA1918 Arapahoe County District",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "126 P.3d 196",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11202666 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 24ca1918 arapahoe county district 126 p.3d 196 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11202666-11202666"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11203817-11203817",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11203817",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11203817",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11203817 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11203817-11203817"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11231628-11231628",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11231628",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Teruel De Torres",
      "extracted_docket_number": "24CA0231 Jefferson County District",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11231628 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 24ca0231 jefferson county district domestic relations order in re marriage of teruel de torres qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11231628-11231628"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11268520-11268520",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11268520",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11268520",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11268520 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11268520-11268520"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11271009-11271009",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11271009",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Robertson",
      "extracted_docket_number": "40791-8-III Marriage of Sams We agree with the superior",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "54 P.3d 708",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11271009 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 40791-8-iii marriage of sams we agree with the superior 54 p.3d 708 in re marriage of robertson qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11271009-11271009"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11289295-11289295",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11289295",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11289295",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11289295 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11289295-11289295"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11290088-11290088",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11290088",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11290088",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "85 So.3d 168",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11290088 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 85 so.3d 168 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11290088-11290088"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11290222-11290222",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11290222",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11290222",
      "extracted_docket_number": "in the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "617 So.2d 880",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11290222 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues in the trial 617 so.2d 880 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11290222-11290222"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11292372-11292372",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11292372",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11292372",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2010-7762 HONORABLE LAURIE A. HULIN",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11292372 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2010-7762 honorable laurie a. hulin domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11292372-11292372"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11293775-11293775",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11293775",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11293775",
      "extracted_docket_number": "C093195 and granted the motion. 2 People also",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11293775 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues c093195 and granted the motion. 2 people also domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11293775-11293775"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-11295349-11295349",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 11295349",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 11295349",
      "extracted_docket_number": "One: Susana asserts that the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 11295349 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues one: susana asserts that the trial domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-11295349-11295349"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1351369-1351369",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1351369",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the MARRIAGE OF Vickie A. THOMASON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "89CA1205. Colorado",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "802 P.2d 1189",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1351369 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 89ca1205. colorado 802 p.2d 1189 in re the marriage of vickie a. thomason qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1351369-1351369"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-156858-156858",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 156858",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 156858",
      "extracted_docket_number": "numbers. These consolidated appeals followed. -2- r",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 156858 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues numbers. these consolidated appeals followed. -2- r domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-156858-156858"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1781904-1781904",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1781904",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1781904",
      "extracted_docket_number": "94-CA-0079",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "639 So.2d 1210",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1781904 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 94-ca-0079 639 so.2d 1210 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1781904-1781904"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-201660-201660",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 201660",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 201660",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 201660 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-201660-201660"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2169651-2169651",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2169651",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2169651",
      "extracted_docket_number": "CX-00-351. Supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "611 N.W.2d 344",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2169651 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues cx-00-351. supreme 611 n.w.2d 344 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2169651-2169651"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2643043-2643043",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2643043",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2643043",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2643043 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2643043-2643043"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2657109-2657109",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2657109",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2657109",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2657109 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2657109-2657109"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2674602-2674602",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2674602",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Link",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-13-1306 Opinion",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2674602 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2-13-1306 opinion domestic relations order in re marriage of link qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2674602-2674602"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2681162-2681162",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2681162",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Link",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-13-1306 Opinion",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2681162 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2-13-1306 opinion domestic relations order in re marriage of link qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2681162-2681162"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2684687-2684687",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2684687",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ANDREA MEKRUT v. MICHAEL SUITS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "935 A.2d 1021",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2684687 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 935 a.2d 1021 andrea mekrut v. michael suits qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2684687-2684687"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2687610-2687610",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2687610",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2687610",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13–0778",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "549 N.W.2d 810",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2687610 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13–0778 549 n.w.2d 810 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2687610-2687610"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2691501-2691501",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2691501",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2691501",
      "extracted_docket_number": "363 EDA 2013",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "462 A.2d 1351",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2691501 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 363 eda 2013 462 a.2d 1351 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2691501-2691501"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2691791-2691791",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2691791",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2691791",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "878 N.E.2d 16",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2691791 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 878 n.e.2d 16 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2691791-2691791"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2696578-2696578",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2696578",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2696578",
      "extracted_docket_number": "9-11-32 by this",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "421 N.E.2d 1293",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2696578 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 9-11-32 by this 421 n.e.2d 1293 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2696578-2696578"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2697121-2697121",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2697121",
      "citation": "DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2697121",
      "extracted_docket_number": "I -2- Case No. 8-08-12 THE TRIAL",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2697121 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues i -2- case no. 8-08-12 the trial domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2697121-2697121"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2698383-2698383",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2698383",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2698383",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "541 N.E.2d 64",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2698383 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 541 n.e.2d 64 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2698383-2698383"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2699541-2699541",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2699541",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2699541",
      "extracted_docket_number": "11CAF110109 8",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "574 N.E.2d 457",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2699541 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 11caf110109 8 574 n.e.2d 457 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2699541-2699541"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2701494-2701494",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2701494",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2701494",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2007CV00115. This",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "887 N.E.2d 352",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2701494 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2007cv00115. this 887 n.e.2d 352 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2701494-2701494"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2704781-2704781",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2704781",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2704781",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "351 N.E.2d 113",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2704781 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 351 n.e.2d 113 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2704781-2704781"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2709824-2709824",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2709824",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Iqbal",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Second District Docket No. 2-13-1306",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2709824 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues second district docket no. 2-13-1306 domestic relations order in re marriage of iqbal qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2709824-2709824"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2724936-2724936",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2724936",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2724936",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2724936 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2724936-2724936"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2725337-2725337",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2725337",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2725337",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "799 N.E.2d 1048",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2725337 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 799 n.e.2d 1048 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2725337-2725337"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2733146-2733146",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2733146",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COURTNEY ROBACZYNSKI v. MARC A. ROBACZYNSKI",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "892 A.2d 964",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2733146 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 892 a.2d 964 courtney robaczynski v. marc a. robaczynski qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2733146-2733146"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2742972-2742972",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2742972",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "K.L. v. E.H",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2742972 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order k.l. v. e.h qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2742972-2742972"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2758554-2758554",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2758554",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2758554",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2758554 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2758554-2758554"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2762691-2762691",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2762691",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Allen",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20130392",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "721 N.W.2d 25",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2762691 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20130392 721 n.w.2d 25 in re marriage of allen qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2762691-2762691"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2765246-2765246",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2765246",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2765246",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2765246 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2765246-2765246"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2778257-2778257",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2778257",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "L.P. v. HD",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2778257 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order l.p. v. hd qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2778257-2778257"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2778358-2778358",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2778358",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2778358",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2502 EDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2778358 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2502 eda 2014 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2778358-2778358"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2783008-2783008",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2783008",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "SONIA KOCHHAR v. AMAR NATH BANSAL",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2783008 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order sonia kochhar v. amar nath bansal qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2783008-2783008"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2792103-2792103",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2792103",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2792103",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2869 EDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2792103 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2869 eda 2014 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2792103-2792103"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2800501-2800501",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2800501",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2800501",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2800501 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2800501-2800501"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2812687-2812687",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2812687",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2812687",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2812687 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2812687-2812687"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2813224-2813224",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2813224",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LLC v. CSX",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "134 S.Ct. 2228",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2813224 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 134 s.ct. 2228 llc v. csx qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2813224-2813224"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2876131-2876131",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2876131",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2876131",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "134 S.W.3d 845",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2876131 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 134 s.w.3d 845 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2876131-2876131"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2904748-2904748",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2904748",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2904748",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2904748 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2904748-2904748"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2918837-2918837",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2918837",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "C.M.S. v. D.E.H",
      "extracted_docket_number": "28 MDA 2015 : Appellants :",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2918837 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 28 mda 2015 : appellants : domestic relations order c.m.s. v. d.e.h qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2918837-2918837"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2971309-2971309",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2971309",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2971309",
      "extracted_docket_number": "02-3672 the district",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2971309 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 02-3672 the district domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2971309-2971309"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3066767-3066767",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3066767",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3066767",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3066767 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3066767-3066767"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3091943-3091943",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3091943",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3091943",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3091943 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3091943-3091943"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3099168-3099168",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3099168",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3099168",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10-09-00254-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "783 S.W.2d 210",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3099168 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 10-09-00254-cv 783 s.w.2d 210 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3099168-3099168"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3113454-3113454",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3113454",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3113454",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "909 S.W.2d 950",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3113454 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 909 s.w.2d 950 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3113454-3113454"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3118922-3118922",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3118922",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Joyner",
      "extracted_docket_number": "entry stating",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "391 S.W.2d 723",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3118922 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues entry stating 391 s.w.2d 723 in re marriage of joyner qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3118922-3118922"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3122519-3122519",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3122519",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3122519",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "283 S.W.3d 506",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3122519 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 283 s.w.3d 506 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3122519-3122519"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3131422-3131422",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3131422",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MERMANN v. TILLITSKI. MELTON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3131422 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues mermann v. tillitski. melton qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3131422-3131422"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3144570-3144570",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3144570",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Pagano",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3144570 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order in re marriage of pagano qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3144570-3144570"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3153916-3153916",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3153916",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3153916",
      "extracted_docket_number": "322289",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3153916 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 322289 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3153916-3153916"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3154387-3154387",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3154387",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3154387",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3154387 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3154387-3154387"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3154621-3154621",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3154621",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3154621",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1378 WDA 2014",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "68 A.3d 354",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3154621 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1378 wda 2014 68 a.3d 354 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3154621-3154621"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3162624-3162624",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3162624",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Howell",
      "extracted_docket_number": "CV-15-0028-PR",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "284 P.3d 880",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3162624 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues cv-15-0028-pr 284 p.3d 880 in re marriage of howell qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3162624-3162624"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3166786-3166786",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3166786",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3166786",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3166786 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3166786-3166786"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3167487-3167487",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3167487",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3167487",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3167487 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3167487-3167487"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3181432-3181432",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3181432",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3181432",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "443 S.W.3d 29",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3181432 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 443 s.w.3d 29 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3181432-3181432"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3184156-3184156",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3184156",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3184156",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3184156 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3184156-3184156"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3190441-3190441",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3190441",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3190441",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3190441 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3190441-3190441"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3212877-3212877",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3212877",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MALLEK v. US PER CURIAM",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "680 F.3d 1377",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3212877 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 680 f.3d 1377 mallek v. us per curiam qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3212877-3212877"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3217472-3217472",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3217472",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CINCINNATI BAR ASSOCIATION v. HOSKINS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "454 S.W.3d 289",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3217472 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 454 s.w.3d 289 cincinnati bar association v. hoskins qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3217472-3217472"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3333069-3333069",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3333069",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3333069",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3333069 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3333069-3333069"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3338056-3338056",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3338056",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3338056",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3338056 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3338056-3338056"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3341620-3341620",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3341620",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3341620",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3341620 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3341620-3341620"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3347225-3347225",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3347225",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3347225",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3347225 us pension / defined benefit issues qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3347225-3347225"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3348655-3348655",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3348655",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3348655",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3348655 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3348655-3348655"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3355870-3355870",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3355870",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3355870",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3355870 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3355870-3355870"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3356304-3356304",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3356304",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3356304",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3356304 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3356304-3356304"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3357681-3357681",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3357681",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3357681",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3357681 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3357681-3357681"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3362807-3362807",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3362807",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3362807",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3362807 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3362807-3362807"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3364741-3364741",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3364741",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3364741",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3364741 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3364741-3364741"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3462903-3462903",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3462903",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3462903",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3462903 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3462903-3462903"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3698753-3698753",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3698753",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3698753",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3698753 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3698753-3698753"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3707131-3707131",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3707131",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3707131",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3707131 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3707131-3707131"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3729533-3729533",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3729533",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3729533",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3729533 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3729533-3729533"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3730689-3730689",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3730689",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3730689",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3730689 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3730689-3730689"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3755962-3755962",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3755962",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3755962",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3755962 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3755962-3755962"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3758748-3758748",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3758748",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3758748",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3758748 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3758748-3758748"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3778343-3778343",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3778343",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3778343",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3778343 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3778343-3778343"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4028785-4028785",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4028785",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4028785",
      "extracted_docket_number": "331605 Lenawee Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4028785 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 331605 lenawee circuit domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4028785-4028785"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4029252-4029252",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4029252",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4029252",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "341 S.W.3d 360",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4029252 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 341 s.w.3d 360 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4029252-4029252"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4048182-4048182",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4048182",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4048182",
      "extracted_docket_number": "10-10-0579-CVW",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4048182 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 10-10-0579-cvw domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4048182-4048182"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4056802-4056802",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4056802",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4056802",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4056802 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4056802-4056802"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4064154-4064154",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4064154",
      "citation": "DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4064154",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "DOMESTIC RELATIONS ORDER",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4064154 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4064154-4064154"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4066162-4066162",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4066162",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4066162",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-15-00150-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4066162 1056(d)(3) us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13-15-00150-cv 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4066162-4066162"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4076691-4076691",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4076691",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4076691",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13-15-00150-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4076691 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13-15-00150-cv domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4076691-4076691"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4084534-4084534",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4084534",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4084534",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4084534 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4084534-4084534"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4085828-4085828",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4085828",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4085828",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2 as an application for leave to",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4085828 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2 as an application for leave to domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4085828-4085828"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4087981-4087981",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4087981",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4087981",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4087981 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4087981-4087981"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4091636-4091636",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4091636",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4091636",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4091636 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4091636-4091636"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4093316-4093316",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4093316",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4093316",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4093316 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4093316-4093316"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4101831-4101831",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4101831",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4101831",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4101831 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4101831-4101831"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4103995-4103995",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4103995",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4103995",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4103995 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4103995-4103995"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4107139-4107139",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4107139",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. JEROME P. JOHNSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": "AG No. 68",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "117 A.3d 38",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4107139 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues ag no. 68 117 a.3d 38 attorney grievance commission of maryland v. jerome p. johnson qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4107139-4107139"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4107536-4107536",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4107536",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4107536",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4107536 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4107536-4107536"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4109718-4109718",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4109718",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4109718",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1842 EDA 2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4109718 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1842 eda 2016 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4109718-4109718"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4113395-4113395",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4113395",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4113395",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4113395 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4113395-4113395"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4113557-4113557",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4113557",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ET AL. v. R ALLEN HUGHES",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "beneficiary_dispute",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4113557 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order et al. v. r allen hughes qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value beneficiary_dispute preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4113557-4113557"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4116779-4116779",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4116779",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4116779",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2 was not submitted to the bankruptcy",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4116779 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2 was not submitted to the bankruptcy domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4116779-4116779"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4161343-4161343",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4161343",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4161343",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "940 S.W.2d 594",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4161343 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 940 s.w.2d 594 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4161343-4161343"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4163843-4163843",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4163843",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4163843",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "405 S.W.3d 470",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4163843 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 405 s.w.3d 470 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4163843-4163843"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4169895-4169895",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4169895",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Lindsey-Robinson",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-16-0184 Opinion",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4169895 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2-16-0184 opinion in re marriage of lindsey-robinson qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4169895-4169895"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4182536-4182536",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4182536",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4182536",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15–1456",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4182536 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 15–1456 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4182536-4182536"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4182946-4182946",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4182946",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Lindsey-Robinson",
      "extracted_docket_number": "Second District Docket No. 2-16-0184",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4182946 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues second district docket no. 2-16-0184 in re marriage of lindsey-robinson qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4182946-4182946"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4191876-4191876",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4191876",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF ABBY HOEGER NABER AND WILLIAM MICHAEL NABER Upon the Petition of ABBY HOEGER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "16-1767",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "824 N.W.2d 481",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4191876 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 16-1767 824 n.w.2d 481 in re the marriage of abby hoeger naber and william michael naber upon the petition of abby hoeger qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4191876-4191876"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4200884-4200884",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4200884",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ZANE M. TYLER",
      "extracted_docket_number": "835 WDA 2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4200884 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 835 wda 2016 domestic relations order in the superior court of pennsylvania v. zane m. tyler qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4200884-4200884"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4211634-4211634",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4211634",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4211634",
      "extracted_docket_number": "52A05-1701-DR-203 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "62 N.E.3d 1212",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4211634 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 52a05-1701-dr-203 v 62 n.e.3d 1212 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4211634-4211634"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4222089-4222089",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4222089",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4222089",
      "extracted_docket_number": "900 MDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4222089 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 900 mda 2017 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4222089-4222089"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4235517-4235517",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4235517",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4235517",
      "extracted_docket_number": "335653 Allegan Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4235517 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 335653 allegan circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4235517-4235517"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4235820-4235820",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4235820",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4235820",
      "extracted_docket_number": "335653 Allegan Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4235820 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 335653 allegan circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4235820-4235820"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4236244-4236244",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4236244",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4236244",
      "extracted_docket_number": "335653 Allegan Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4236244 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 335653 allegan circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4236244-4236244"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4240936-4240936",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4240936",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4240936",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17CA0255 Garfield County District",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4240936 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 17ca0255 garfield county district domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4240936-4240936"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4243938-4243938",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4243938",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "JACQUELINE EDWARDS IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ROBERT EDWARDS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1956 MDA 2016",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "719 A.2d 306",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4243938 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1956 mda 2016 719 a.2d 306 jacqueline edwards in the superior court of pennsylvania v. robert edwards qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4243938-4243938"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4249164-4249164",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4249164",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4249164",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15–1456",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4249164 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 15–1456 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4249164-4249164"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4249452-4249452",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4249452",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4249452",
      "extracted_docket_number": "13–0372",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "790 N.W.2d 791",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4249452 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 13–0372 790 n.w.2d 791 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4249452-4249452"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4281185-4281185",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4281185",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4281185",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA17-787",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4281185 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues coa17-787 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4281185-4281185"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4287825-4287825",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4287825",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4287825",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18A-DR-326 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "869 N.E.2d 1232",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4287825 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 18a-dr-326 v 869 n.e.2d 1232 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4287825-4287825"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4297254-4297254",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4297254",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Moore",
      "extracted_docket_number": "for August 5",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4297254 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues for august 5 domestic relations order in re estate of moore qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4297254-4297254"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4301612-4301612",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4301612",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Whitley",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1139 EDA 2017",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "163 A.3d 399",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4301612 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1139 eda 2017 163 a.3d 399 in re estate of whitley qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4301612-4301612"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4302933-4302933",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4302933",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4302933",
      "extracted_docket_number": "L-17-1157 Appellee Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "999 N.E.2d 214",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4302933 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues l-17-1157 appellee trial 999 n.e.2d 214 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4302933-4302933"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4331479-4331479",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4331479",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4331479",
      "extracted_docket_number": "27001-95",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4331479 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 27001-95 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4331479-4331479"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4343282-4343282",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4343282",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "COA MARSHA P. NELSON APPELLANT v. JAMES A. NELSON APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4343282 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues coa marsha p. nelson appellant v. james a. nelson appellee date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4343282-4343282"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4366580-4366580",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4366580",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Estate of Borkowski",
      "extracted_docket_number": "25 WDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4366580 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 25 wda 2018 domestic relations order in re estate of borkowski qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4366580-4366580"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4371359-4371359",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4371359",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4371359",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4371359 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4371359-4371359"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4381979-4381979",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4381979",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "L.P. v. EQT",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18-5575 UNITED STATES",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "39 F. Supp. 3d 877",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4381979 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 18-5575 united states 39 f. supp. 3d 877 l.p. v. eqt qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4381979-4381979"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4389581-4389581",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4389581",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4389581",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "741 P.2d 432",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4389581 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 741 p.2d 432 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4389581-4389581"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4391215-4391215",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4391215",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4391215",
      "extracted_docket_number": "06-18-00076-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4391215 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 06-18-00076-cv domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4391215-4391215"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4393836-4393836",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4393836",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4393836",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4393836 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4393836-4393836"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4411250-4411250",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4411250",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4411250",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "741 P.2d 432",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4411250 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 741 p.2d 432 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4411250-4411250"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4427266-4427266",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4427266",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Werths",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "33 S.W.3d 541",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4427266 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 33 s.w.3d 541 in re marriage of werths qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4427266-4427266"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4452468-4452468",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4452468",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4452468",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3315 EDA 2018",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4452468 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 3315 eda 2018 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4452468-4452468"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4456496-4456496",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4456496",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4456496",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "327 S.W.3d 250",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4456496 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 327 s.w.3d 250 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4456496-4456496"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4461826-4461826",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4461826",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4461826",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "148 S.W.3d 124",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4461826 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 148 s.w.3d 124 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4461826-4461826"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4493521-4493521",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4493521",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4493521",
      "extracted_docket_number": "04-19-00818-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4493521 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 04-19-00818-cv qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4493521-4493521"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4501793-4501793",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4501793",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4501793",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1284 WDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4501793 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1284 wda 2019 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4501793-4501793"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4502837-4502837",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4502837",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4502837",
      "extracted_docket_number": "05-18-00968-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "97 S.W.3d 179",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4502837 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 05-18-00968-cv 97 s.w.3d 179 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4502837-4502837"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4511740-4511740",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4511740",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4511740",
      "extracted_docket_number": "04-19-00818-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "466 S.W.3d 783",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4511740 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 04-19-00818-cv 466 s.w.3d 783 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4511740-4511740"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4513625-4513625",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4513625",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4513625",
      "extracted_docket_number": "WM-19-012 Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4513625 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues wm-19-012 trial domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4513625-4513625"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4521478-4521478",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4521478",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF DONNA SULLINS AND RAY SULLINS Upon the Petition of DONNA SULLINS",
      "extracted_docket_number": "19-0043",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "715 N.W.2d 242",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4521478 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 19-0043 715 n.w.2d 242 in re the marriage of donna sullins and ray sullins upon the petition of donna sullins qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4521478-4521478"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4527608-4527608",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4527608",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Debuff",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "443 P.3d 418",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4527608 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 443 p.3d 418 in re marriage of debuff qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4527608-4527608"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4527946-4527946",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4527946",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4527946",
      "extracted_docket_number": "04-19-00818-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4527946 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 04-19-00818-cv qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4527946-4527946"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4527947-4527947",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4527947",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4527947",
      "extracted_docket_number": "04-19-00818-CV",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "466 S.W.3d 783",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4527947 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 04-19-00818-cv 466 s.w.3d 783 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4527947-4527947"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4530942-4530942",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4530942",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4530942",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4530942 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4530942-4530942"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4541756-4541756",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4541756",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4541756",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "479 S.W.2d 2",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4541756 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 479 s.w.2d 2 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4541756-4541756"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4548033-4548033",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4548033",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "B.W. v. R.F",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2018-0700",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "991 N.E.2d 684",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4548033 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2018-0700 991 n.e.2d 684 b.w. v. r.f qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4548033-4548033"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4549162-4549162",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4549162",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4549162",
      "extracted_docket_number": "WD-20-005 Appellee Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4549162 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues wd-20-005 appellee trial domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4549162-4549162"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4556565-4556565",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4556565",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4556565",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4556565 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4556565-4556565"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4557243-4557243",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4557243",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "J.P. v. J.S",
      "extracted_docket_number": "3292 EDA 2019",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4557243 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 3292 eda 2019 domestic relations order j.p. v. j.s qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4557243-4557243"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4570686-4570686",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4570686",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "D.C. v. J.A.C",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20A-DR-317 v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "977 N.E.2d 951",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4570686 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20a-dr-317 v 977 n.e.2d 951 d.c. v. j.a.c qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4570686-4570686"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4577028-4577028",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4577028",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4577028",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4577028 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4577028-4577028"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4585457-4585457",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4585457",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4585457",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4585457 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4585457-4585457"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4641777-4641777",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4641777",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4641777",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4641777 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4641777-4641777"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4660635-4660635",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4660635",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4660635",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4660635 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4660635-4660635"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4661610-4661610",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4661610",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4661610",
      "extracted_docket_number": "896 MDA 2020",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "866 A.2d 394",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4661610 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 896 mda 2020 866 a.2d 394 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4661610-4661610"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4663099-4663099",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4663099",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4663099",
      "extracted_docket_number": "17CA0255 Garfield County District",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4663099 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 17ca0255 garfield county district domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4663099-4663099"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4664265-4664265",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4664265",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4664265",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4664265 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4664265-4664265"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4669076-4669076",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4669076",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "LORAIN COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. LEWIS",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "906 N.E.2d 1102",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4669076 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 906 n.e.2d 1102 lorain county bar association v. lewis qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4669076-4669076"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4674780-4674780",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4674780",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4674780",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2020AP1082-D STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "778 N.W.2d 154",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4674780 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2020ap1082-d state of wisconsin : in supreme 778 n.w.2d 154 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4674780-4674780"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4679847-4679847",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4679847",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4679847",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4679847 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4679847-4679847"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4685607-4685607",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4685607",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4685607",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4685607 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4685607-4685607"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4691600-4691600",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4691600",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Ramsey & Echols",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of hours worked or offer any other details. The",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4691600 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues of hours worked or offer any other details. the domestic relations order in re marriage of ramsey & echols qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4691600-4691600"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4709798-4709798",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4709798",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4709798",
      "extracted_docket_number": "when it dismissed Anderson",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "21 A.3d 62",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4709798 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues when it dismissed anderson 21 a.3d 62 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4709798-4709798"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4794620-4794620",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4794620",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4794620",
      "extracted_docket_number": "351858 Clinton Circuit",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4794620 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 351858 clinton circuit qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4794620-4794620"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4908539-4908539",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4908539",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "ANNA SINCLAIR-JAMISON v. DEMETRISE PINKERTON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4908539 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order anna sinclair-jamison v. demetrise pinkerton qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4908539-4908539"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4969750-4969750",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4969750",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "F.T. v. L.J",
      "extracted_docket_number": "H045078. 3 B",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "5 Cal.App.5th 69",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4969750 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues h045078. 3 b 5 cal.app.5th 69 f.t. v. l.j qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4969750-4969750"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5078025-5078025",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5078025",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5078025",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5078025 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5078025-5078025"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5115720-5115720",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5115720",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5115720",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "133 S.W.3d 217",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "preemption"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5115720 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 133 s.w.3d 217 qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement present_value preemption",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5115720-5115720"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5128799-5128799",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5128799",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5128799",
      "extracted_docket_number": "615 MDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5128799 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 615 mda 2021 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5128799-5128799"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5133718-5133718",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5133718",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5133718",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5133718 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5133718-5133718"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5138908-5138908",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5138908",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5138908",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20170916-CA",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5138908 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 20170916-ca domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5138908-5138908"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5139293-5139293",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5139293",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "E.M.R. v. C.A.F",
      "extracted_docket_number": "473 MDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "789 A.2d 254",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5139293 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 473 mda 2021 789 a.2d 254 e.m.r. v. c.a.f qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5139293-5139293"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5140215-5140215",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5140215",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5140215",
      "extracted_docket_number": "595 WDA 2021 Appellant :",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "169 A.3d 632",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5140215 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 595 wda 2021 appellant : 169 a.3d 632 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5140215-5140215"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6111740-6111740",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6111740",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "M.B. v. R.B",
      "extracted_docket_number": "18-FD-2643 OPINION This is an",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "161 S.W.2d 769",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6111740 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 18-fd-2643 opinion this is an 161 s.w.2d 769 m.b. v. r.b qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6111740-6111740"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6328430-6328430",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6328430",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6328430",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6328430 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6328430-6328430"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6338450-6338450",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6338450",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6338450",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1308 MDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6338450 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1308 mda 2021 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6338450-6338450"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6347916-6347916",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6347916",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6347916",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6347916 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6347916-6347916"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6353405-6353405",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6353405",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6353405",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "711 S.W.2d 230",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6353405 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 711 s.w.2d 230 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6353405-6353405"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-6495445-6495445",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 6495445",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 6495445",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 6495445 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-6495445-6495445"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7275382-7275382",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7275382",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CHERYL ABBOTT OLSON v. BRIAN MATTHEW OLSON",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7275382 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order cheryl abbott olson v. brian matthew olson qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7275382-7275382"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-76899-76899",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 76899",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 76899",
      "extracted_docket_number": "02-00067-CV-JTC-3 RICHARD CHARLES FONTAINE",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 76899 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 02-00067-cv-jtc-3 richard charles fontaine domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-76899-76899"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7797420-7797420",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7797420",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF THOMAS EDWARD GRAY AND NORMALEENA RAMIREZ GRAY n",
      "extracted_docket_number": "21-0580",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "708 N.W.2d 347",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7797420 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 21-0580 708 n.w.2d 347 in re the marriage of thomas edward gray and normaleena ramirez gray n qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7797420-7797420"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7800221-7800221",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7800221",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "LLC v. FI",
      "extracted_docket_number": "for this case are cited as",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7800221 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues for this case are cited as domestic relations order llc v. fi qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7800221-7800221"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-7827908-7827908",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 7827908",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Miller",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2-21-0608 Order",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 7827908 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2-21-0608 order in re marriage of miller qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-7827908-7827908"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8207755-8207755",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8207755",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8207755",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8207755 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8207755-8207755"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-829938-829938",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 829938",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 829938",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 829938 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-829938-829938"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8404988-8404988",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8404988",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8404988",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "301 P.3d 850",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8404988 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 301 p.3d 850 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8404988-8404988"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8405420-8405420",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8405420",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8405420",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "301 P.3d 850",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8405420 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 301 p.3d 850 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8405420-8405420"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8406622-8406622",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8406622",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8406622",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "301 P.3d 850",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8406622 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 301 p.3d 850 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8406622-8406622"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8407190-8407190",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8407190",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8407190",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1343 EDA 2022",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8407190 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1343 eda 2022 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8407190-8407190"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8482508-8482508",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8482508",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8482508",
      "extracted_docket_number": "an adjudicatory hearing on another date within thir",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8482508 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues an adjudicatory hearing on another date within thir domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8482508-8482508"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-8482518-8482518",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 8482518",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 8482518",
      "extracted_docket_number": "an adjudicatory hearing on another date within thir",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 8482518 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues an adjudicatory hearing on another date within thir domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-8482518-8482518"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-859699-859699",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 859699",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "SCT JOAN WILLIAMS HOLLOMAN v. RONALD B. HOLLOMAN DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 859699 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues sct joan williams holloman v. ronald b. holloman date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-859699-859699"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-865748-865748",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 865748",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DECEASED v. MISSISSIPPI DIVISION OF MEDICAID DATE OF JUDGMENT",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "534 U.S. 473",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 865748 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 534 u.s. 473 deceased v. mississippi division of medicaid date of judgment qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-865748-865748"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-873622-873622",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 873622",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "In re the Marriage of BOYD KEVIN and VICKI L. WEAVER. BOYD KEVIN WEAVER",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "200 Cal.App.4th 1401",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 873622 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 200 cal.app.4th 1401 in re the marriage of boyd kevin and vicki l. weaver. boyd kevin weaver qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-873622-873622"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-885478-885478",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 885478",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF LINDA K. HARKIN",
      "extracted_docket_number": "99-080",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 885478 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 99-080 in re the marriage of linda k. harkin qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-885478-885478"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-887400-887400",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 887400",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In re Marriage of Czapranski",
      "extracted_docket_number": "04-050",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 887400 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 04-050 domestic relations order in re marriage of czapranski qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-887400-887400"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-888417-888417",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 888417",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 888417",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of requests to the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "941 P.2d 441",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 888417 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues of requests to the 941 p.2d 441 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-888417-888417"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9351522-9351522",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9351522",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9351522",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9351522 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9351522-9351522"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9367450-9367450",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9367450",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9367450",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9367450 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9367450-9367450"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9367997-9367997",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9367997",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9367997",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1919 EDA 2021",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9367997 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 1919 eda 2021 domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9367997-9367997"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9368674-9368674",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9368674",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9368674",
      "extracted_docket_number": "211 WDA 2022",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "869 A.2d 548",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9368674 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 211 wda 2022 869 a.2d 548 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9368674-9368674"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9369048-9369048",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9369048",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9369048",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9369048 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9369048-9369048"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9372616-9372616",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9372616",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9372616",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "514 N.E.2d 1122",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9372616 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 514 n.e.2d 1122 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9372616-9372616"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9376915-9376915",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9376915",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9376915",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "806 S.W.2d 791",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9376915 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 806 s.w.2d 791 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9376915-9376915"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9390208-9390208",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9390208",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9390208",
      "extracted_docket_number": "NUMBER Appellant",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9390208 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues number appellant domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9390208-9390208"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9839649-9839649",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9839649",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9839649",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9839649 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9839649-9839649"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9882431-9882431",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9882431",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "M.A.M. v. A.P.H",
      "extracted_docket_number": "29763 Appellee : : Trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9882431 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 29763 appellee : : trial domestic relations order m.a.m. v. a.p.h qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9882431-9882431"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9890515-9890515",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9890515",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "MR MICHAEL VINCENT LUSARDI APPELLANT APPEAL FROM BOONE CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE JENNIFER R. DUSING",
      "extracted_docket_number": "2022-CA-1305-MR MICHAEL VINCENT LUSARDI APPELLANT",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "617 S.W.2d 871",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9890515 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 2022-ca-1305-mr michael vincent lusardi appellant 617 s.w.2d 871 mr michael vincent lusardi appellant appeal from boone circuit court v. honorable jennifer r. dusing qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9890515-9890515"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9905550-9905550",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9905550",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9905550",
      "extracted_docket_number": "206 WDA 2023",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "935 A.2d 547",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9905550 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 206 wda 2023 935 a.2d 547 qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9905550-9905550"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9905557-9905557",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9905557",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9905557",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9905557 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9905557-9905557"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9918439-9918439",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9918439",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9918439",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9918439 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9918439-9918439"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9927000-9927000",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9927000",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9927000",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9927000 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9927000-9927000"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9950942-9950942",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9950942",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9950942",
      "extracted_docket_number": "sheet in the Clerk",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9950942 domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues sheet in the clerk domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9950942-9950942"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9967252-9967252",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9967252",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9967252",
      "extracted_docket_number": "30592 Appellant/Cross-Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9967252 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 30592 appellant/cross-appellee v qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9967252-9967252"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9967472-9967472",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9967472",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9967472",
      "extracted_docket_number": "30592 Appellant/Cross-Appellee v",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9967472 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 30592 appellant/cross-appellee v qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9967472-9967472"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-9994017-9994017",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 9994017",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 9994017",
      "extracted_docket_number": "79 is Defendant Benefits Committee of the ConocoPhi",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "994 F.3d 1020",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 9994017 us pension / defined benefit issues 79 is defendant benefits committee of the conocophi 994 f.3d 1020 qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-9994017-9994017"
    },
    {
      "slug": "dina-l-dufresne-v-james-p-crosskey-3365098",
      "title": "Dina L. Dufresne v. James P. Crosskey",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Dina L. Dufresne v. James P. Crosskey",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3369558/dufresne-v-crosskey-no-fa96-0322993-s-mar-16-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3369558",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-03-16",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "dina l. dufresne v. james p. crosskey us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3369558 dina l. dufresne v. james p. crosskey qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/dina-l-dufresne-v-james-p-crosskey-3365098"
    },
    {
      "slug": "gary-sagen-v-carolyn-sagen-3346073",
      "title": "Gary Sagen v. Carolyn Sagen",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Gary Sagen v. Carolyn Sagen",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3350550/sagen-v-sagen-no-107427-mar-26-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3350550",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-03-26",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "gary sagen v. carolyn sagen us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3350550 gary sagen v. carolyn sagen qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/gary-sagen-v-carolyn-sagen-3346073"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jeffrey-a-davis-v-joanne-m-davis-3364717",
      "title": "Jeffrey A. Davis v. Joanne M. Davis.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Jeffrey A. Davis v. Joanne M. Davis.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3369177/davis-v-davis-no-fa-99-0721899-s-jun-29-2001/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3369177",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2001-06-29",
      "citation_year": 2001,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "jeffrey a. davis v. joanne m. davis. us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3369177 jeffrey a. davis v. joanne m. davis. qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jeffrey-a-davis-v-joanne-m-davis-3364717"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-boyle-v-anne-m-boyle-3351532",
      "title": "John Boyle v. Anne M. Boyle.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John Boyle v. Anne M. Boyle.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3356005/boyle-v-boyle-no-0101153-oct-24-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3356005",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-10-24",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "john boyle v. anne m. boyle. us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3356005 john boyle v. anne m. boyle. qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-boyle-v-anne-m-boyle-3351532"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-k-hart-v-ann-j-hart-3342230",
      "title": "John K. Hart v. Ann J. Hart",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John K. Hart v. Ann J. Hart",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3346714/hart-v-hart-no-fa-96-0389036s-jul-10-1998/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3346714",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1998-07-10",
      "citation_year": 1998,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "john k. hart v. ann j. hart us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3346714 john k. hart v. ann j. hart qualified_domestic_relations_order beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-k-hart-v-ann-j-hart-3342230"
    },
    {
      "slug": "john-m-gasparine-v-barbara-e-gasparine-3327351",
      "title": "John M. Gasparine v. Barbara E. Gasparine",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "John M. Gasparine v. Barbara E. Gasparine",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3331850/gasparine-v-gasparine-no-fa97-0401093s-jan-6-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3331850",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-01-06",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "survivor_annuity",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "john m. gasparine v. barbara e. gasparine us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3331850 john m. gasparine v. barbara e. gasparine qualified_domestic_relations_order survivor_annuity present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/john-m-gasparine-v-barbara-e-gasparine-3327351"
    },
    {
      "slug": "kathy-gruner-v-jerry-gruner-3324465",
      "title": "Kathy Gruner v. Jerry Gruner",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Kathy Gruner v. Jerry Gruner",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3328968/gruner-v-gruner-no-fa97-0158261-apr-29-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3328968",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-04-29",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "kathy gruner v. jerry gruner us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3328968 kathy gruner v. jerry gruner qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/kathy-gruner-v-jerry-gruner-3324465"
    },
    {
      "slug": "kenneth-jalbert-v-theresa-jalbert-3343023",
      "title": "Kenneth Jalbert v. Theresa Jalbert",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Kenneth Jalbert v. Theresa Jalbert",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3347507/jalbert-v-jalbert-no-fa-99-68152-dec-26-2000/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3347507",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2000-12-26",
      "citation_year": 2000,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "kenneth jalbert v. theresa jalbert us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3347507 kenneth jalbert v. theresa jalbert qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/kenneth-jalbert-v-theresa-jalbert-3343023"
    },
    {
      "slug": "lon-clarke-ruckel-v-deborah-deniese-ruckel-2906468",
      "title": "Lon Clarke Ruckel v. Deborah Deniese Ruckel",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Lon Clarke Ruckel v. Deborah Deniese Ruckel",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20971 MEMORANDUM OPINION Lon Clarke Ruckel",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2906468/lon-clarke-ruckel-v-deborah-deniese-ruckel/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "2906468",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2007-02-08",
      "citation_year": 2007,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "lon clarke ruckel v. deborah deniese ruckel domestic relations order us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 2906468 20971 memorandum opinion lon clarke ruckel domestic relations order lon clarke ruckel v. deborah deniese ruckel qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/lon-clarke-ruckel-v-deborah-deniese-ruckel-2906468"
    },
    {
      "slug": "marie-besson-v-ronald-besson-3348222",
      "title": "Marie Besson v. Ronald Besson",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Marie Besson v. Ronald Besson",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3352699/besson-v-besson-no-fa96-0151407-s-oct-22-1997/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3352699",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1997-10-22",
      "citation_year": 1997,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "marie besson v. ronald besson us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3352699 marie besson v. ronald besson qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/marie-besson-v-ronald-besson-3348222"
    },
    {
      "slug": "maryann-king-v-william-l-king-jr-3354415",
      "title": "Maryann King v. William L. King, Jr.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Maryann King v. William L. King, Jr.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3358883/king-v-king-no-31-66-72-jun-5-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3358883",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-06-05",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "maryann king v. william l. king, jr. us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3358883 maryann king v. william l. king, jr. qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/maryann-king-v-william-l-king-jr-3354415"
    },
    {
      "slug": "nancy-m-ollinger-v-martin-ollinger-3343688",
      "title": "Nancy M. Ollinger v. Martin Ollinger",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Nancy M. Ollinger v. Martin Ollinger",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3348171/ollinger-v-ollinger-no-31-90-63-jul-29-1996/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3348171",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1996-07-29",
      "citation_year": 1996,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "nancy m. ollinger v. martin ollinger us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3348171 nancy m. ollinger v. martin ollinger qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/nancy-m-ollinger-v-martin-ollinger-3343688"
    },
    {
      "slug": "paul-j-roach-v-mary-f-roach-3333255",
      "title": "Paul J. Roach v. Mary F. Roach.",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Paul J. Roach v. Mary F. Roach.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3337750/roach-v-roach-no-fa-860080959s-may-20-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3337750",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-05-20",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "paul j. roach v. mary f. roach. us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3337750 paul j. roach v. mary f. roach. qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/paul-j-roach-v-mary-f-roach-3333255"
    },
    {
      "slug": "pellegrino-mancini-v-mary-j-mancini-3352737",
      "title": "Pellegrino Mancini v. Mary J. Mancini",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Pellegrino Mancini v. Mary J. Mancini",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3357206/mancini-v-mancini-no-092292-feb-27-1991/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3357206",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1991-02-27",
      "citation_year": 1991,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "pellegrino mancini v. mary j. mancini us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3357206 pellegrino mancini v. mary j. mancini qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/pellegrino-mancini-v-mary-j-mancini-3352737"
    },
    {
      "slug": "rathblott-v-rathblott-3344347",
      "title": "Rathblott v. Rathblott",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Rathblott v. Rathblott",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3348829/rathblott-v-rathblott-no-fa-97-0162348-s-jan-13-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3348829",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-01-13",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "rathblott v. rathblott us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 3348829 rathblott v. rathblott qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/rathblott-v-rathblott-3344347"
    },
    {
      "slug": "robert-j-larson-v-lynn-ann-mc-caffrey-3370642",
      "title": "Robert J. Larson v. Lynn Ann Mc Caffrey",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Robert J. Larson v. Lynn Ann Mc Caffrey",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3375098/larson-v-mc-caffrey-no-103700-dec-2-1994/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3375098",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1994-12-02",
      "citation_year": 1994,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "robert j. larson v. lynn ann mc caffrey us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3375098 robert j. larson v. lynn ann mc caffrey qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/robert-j-larson-v-lynn-ann-mc-caffrey-3370642"
    },
    {
      "slug": "sandra-weitlauf-v-james-weitlauf-3352683",
      "title": "Sandra Weitlauf v. James Weitlauf",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Sandra Weitlauf v. James Weitlauf",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3357152/weitlauf-v-weitlauf-no-0546604-jun-9-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3357152",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-06-09",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "sandra weitlauf v. james weitlauf us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3357152 sandra weitlauf v. james weitlauf qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/sandra-weitlauf-v-james-weitlauf-3352683"
    },
    {
      "slug": "thomas-mcauley-v-kathryn-mcauley-3330832",
      "title": "Thomas McAuley v. Kathryn McAuley",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Thomas McAuley v. Kathryn McAuley",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3335328/mcauley-v-mcauley-no-fa-98-0353090-s-jun-18-1999/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3335328",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1999-06-18",
      "citation_year": 1999,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 12,
      "search_terms": "thomas mcauley v. kathryn mcauley us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3335328 thomas mcauley v. kathryn mcauley qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/thomas-mcauley-v-kathryn-mcauley-3330832"
    },
    {
      "slug": "burke-v-state-899311",
      "title": "Burke v. State",
      "citation": "2012 ND 169",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Burke v. State",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20110231",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2012 ND 169",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/899311/burke-v-state/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "899311",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2012-08-16",
      "citation_year": 2012,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "burke v. state 2012 nd 169 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 899311 20110231 2012 nd 169 burke v. state qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/burke-v-state-899311"
    },
    {
      "slug": "carkuff-v-balmer-898954",
      "title": "Carkuff v. Balmer",
      "citation": "2011 ND 60",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Carkuff v. Balmer",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20100237",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2011 ND 60",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/898954/carkuff-v-balmer/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "898954",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2011-03-22",
      "citation_year": 2011,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "carkuff v. balmer 2011 nd 60 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 898954 20100237 2011 nd 60 carkuff v. balmer qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/carkuff-v-balmer-898954"
    },
    {
      "slug": "cody-v-cody-4376642",
      "title": "Cody v. Cody",
      "citation": "2019 ND 14",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Cody v. Cody",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20180120",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2019 ND 14",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4599389/cody-v-cody/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4599389",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2019-01-15",
      "citation_year": 2019,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "cody v. cody 2019 nd 14 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 4599389 20180120 2019 nd 14 cody v. cody qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/cody-v-cody-4376642"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-219782-219782",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 219782",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 219782",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 219782 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-219782-219782"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2382176-2382176",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2382176",
      "citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 2382176",
      "extracted_docket_number": "97-615-Appeal. Supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "Domestic Relations Order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2382176 domestic relations order us family-law retirement/property division context 97-615-appeal. supreme domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2382176-2382176"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3331514-3331514",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3331514",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3331514",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3331514 domestic relations order us pension / defined benefit issues domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3331514-3331514"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3360534-3360534",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3360534",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3360534",
      "extracted_docket_number": "for trial of the custody issues. By stipulation dat",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3360534 us pension / defined benefit issues for trial of the custody issues. by stipulation dat qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3360534-3360534"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-5084734-5084734",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 5084734",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 5084734",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 5084734 us family-law retirement/property division context qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-5084734-5084734"
    },
    {
      "slug": "fulgium-v-fulgium-10487699",
      "title": "Fulgium v. Fulgium",
      "citation": "240 Md. App. 269",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Fulgium v. Fulgium",
      "extracted_docket_number": "CAD16-32242 REPORTED",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "240 Md. App. 269",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10021098/fulgium-v-fulgium/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "10021098",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2019-02-27",
      "citation_year": 2019,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "fulgium v. fulgium 240 md. app. 269 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 10021098 cad16-32242 reported 240 md. app. 269 fulgium v. fulgium qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/fulgium-v-fulgium-10487699"
    },
    {
      "slug": "gerving-v-gerving-4539759",
      "title": "Gerving v. Gerving",
      "citation": "2020 ND 116",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Gerving v. Gerving",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20190253",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2020 ND 116",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4759412/gerving-v-gerving/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4759412",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2020-06-02",
      "citation_year": 2020,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "gerving v. gerving 2020 nd 116 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 4759412 20190253 2020 nd 116 gerving v. gerving qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/gerving-v-gerving-4539759"
    },
    {
      "slug": "in-re-richard-shaputis-on-habeas-corpus-844231",
      "title": "In Re RICHARD SHAPUTIS on Habeas Corpus",
      "citation": "265 P.3d 253",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In Re RICHARD SHAPUTIS on Habeas Corpus",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of psychological tests. All the results were",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "265 P.3d 253",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/844231/in-re-shaputis/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "844231",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2011-12-29",
      "citation_year": 2011,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "in re richard shaputis on habeas corpus 265 p.3d 253 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 844231 of psychological tests. all the results were 265 p.3d 253 in re richard shaputis on habeas corpus qualified_domestic_relations_order pension",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/in-re-richard-shaputis-on-habeas-corpus-844231"
    },
    {
      "slug": "in-re-the-marriage-of-julie-r-and-timothy-p-green-julie-r-green-appellant-v-timothy-p-gree",
      "title": "In Re the Marriage of JULIE R. and TIMOTHY P. GREEN. JULIE R. GREEN, Appellant, v. TIMOTHY P. GREEN, Respondent",
      "citation": "56 Cal. 4th 1130",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In Re the Marriage of JULIE R. and TIMOTHY P. GREEN. JULIE R. GREEN, Appellant, v. TIMOTHY P. GREEN, Respondent",
      "extracted_docket_number": "S203561 Date",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "56 Cal. 4th 1130",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/931141/marr-of-green/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "931141",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2013-06-24",
      "citation_year": 2013,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "in re the marriage of julie r. and timothy p. green. julie r. green, appellant, v. timothy p. green, respondent 56 cal. 4th 1130 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 931141 s203561 date 56 cal. 4th 1130 in re the marriage of julie r. and timothy p. green. julie r. green, appellant, v. timothy p. green, respondent qualified_domestic_relations_order pension public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/in-re-the-marriage-of-julie-r-and-timothy-p-green-julie-r-green-appellant-v-timothy-p-gree"
    },
    {
      "slug": "in-re-the-marriage-of-sandi-i-hansen-and-andrew-j-hansen-upon-the-petition-of-sandi-i-hans",
      "title": "In Re the MARRIAGE OF Sandi I. HANSEN and Andrew J. Hansen Upon the Petition of Sandi I. Hansen, Petitioner-Appellee, and Concerning Andrew J. Hansen, Respondent-Appellant",
      "citation": "886 N.W.2d 868",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In Re the MARRIAGE OF Sandi I. HANSEN and Andrew J. Hansen Upon the Petition of Sandi I. Hansen, Petitioner-Appellee, and Concerning Andrew J. Hansen, Respondent-Appellant",
      "extracted_docket_number": "15-1825",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "886 N.W.2d 868",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4242013/in-re-the-marriage-of-sandi-i-hansen-and-andrew-j-hansen-upon-the/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4242013",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2016-07-27",
      "citation_year": 2016,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "in re the marriage of sandi i. hansen and andrew j. hansen upon the petition of sandi i. hansen, petitioner-appellee, and concerning andrew j. hansen, respondent-appellant 886 n.w.2d 868 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 4242013 15-1825 886 n.w.2d 868 in re the marriage of sandi i. hansen and andrew j. hansen upon the petition of sandi i. hansen, petitioner-appellee, and concerning andrew j. hansen, respondent-appellant qualified_domestic_relations_order pension present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/in-re-the-marriage-of-sandi-i-hansen-and-andrew-j-hansen-upon-the-petition-of-sandi-i-hans"
    },
    {
      "slug": "leners-v-leners-4416287",
      "title": "Leners v. Leners",
      "citation": "302 Neb. 904",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Leners v. Leners",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "302 Neb. 904",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4639034/leners-v-leners/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4639034",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2019-04-19",
      "citation_year": 2019,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "public_employee_retirement",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "leners v. leners 302 neb. 904 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 4639034 302 neb. 904 leners v. leners qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k public_employee_retirement present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/leners-v-leners-4416287"
    },
    {
      "slug": "mark-miles-waldrip-v-angela-eason-waldrip-10784924",
      "title": "Mark Miles Waldrip v. Angela Eason Waldrip",
      "citation": "2025 Ark. App. 29",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Mark Miles Waldrip v. Angela Eason Waldrip",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2025 Ark. App. 29",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10318336/mark-miles-waldrip-v-angela-eason-waldrip/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "10318336",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2025-01-22",
      "citation_year": 2025,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "mark miles waldrip v. angela eason waldrip 2025 ark. app. 29 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 10318336 2025 ark. app. 29 mark miles waldrip v. angela eason waldrip qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/mark-miles-waldrip-v-angela-eason-waldrip-10784924"
    },
    {
      "slug": "mertz-v-mertz-2770819",
      "title": "Mertz v. Mertz",
      "citation": "2015 ND 13",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Mertz v. Mertz",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20140072",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2015 ND 13",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2770819/mertz-v-mertz/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "2770819",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2015-01-15",
      "citation_year": 2015,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "mertz v. mertz 2015 nd 13 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 2770819 20140072 2015 nd 13 mertz v. mertz qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/mertz-v-mertz-2770819"
    },
    {
      "slug": "nagle-v-nagle-11043311",
      "title": "Nagle v. Nagle",
      "citation": "2025 ND 94",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Nagle v. Nagle",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20240260",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2025 ND 94",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10576723/nagle-v-nagle/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "10576723",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2025-05-08",
      "citation_year": 2025,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "nagle v. nagle 2025 nd 94 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 10576723 20240260 2025 nd 94 nagle v. nagle qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/nagle-v-nagle-11043311"
    },
    {
      "slug": "russ-v-russ-11072021",
      "title": "Russ v. Russ",
      "citation": "2021 NMSC 014",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Russ v. Russ",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2021 NMSC 014",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10605433/russ-v-russ/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "10605433",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2021-04-01",
      "citation_year": 2021,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "russ v. russ 2021 nmsc 014 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 10605433 2021 nmsc 014 russ v. russ qualified_domestic_relations_order military_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/russ-v-russ-11072021"
    },
    {
      "slug": "sims-v-sims-4539754",
      "title": "Sims v. Sims",
      "citation": "2020 ND 110",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Sims v. Sims",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20190248",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2020 ND 110",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4759407/sims-v-sims/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4759407",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2020-06-02",
      "citation_year": 2020,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "military_retirement",
        "present_value",
        "alternate_payee"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "sims v. sims 2020 nd 110 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 4759407 20190248 2020 nd 110 sims v. sims qualified_domestic_relations_order pension military_retirement present_value alternate_payee",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/sims-v-sims-4539754"
    },
    {
      "slug": "state-v-huether-898878",
      "title": "State v. Huether",
      "citation": "2010 ND 233",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "State v. Huether",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20100178",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2010 ND 233",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/898878/state-v-huether/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "898878",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2010-12-02",
      "citation_year": 2010,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "state v. huether 2010 nd 233 us pension / defined benefit issues courtlistener.com 898878 20100178 2010 nd 233 state v. huether qualified_domestic_relations_order pension 401k present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/state-v-huether-898878"
    },
    {
      "slug": "westwood-v-darnell-4292033",
      "title": "Westwood v. Darnell",
      "citation": "299 Neb. 612",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Westwood v. Darnell",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "299 Neb. 612",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4514780/westwood-v-darnell/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4514780",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2018-04-13",
      "citation_year": 2018,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 11,
      "search_terms": "westwood v. darnell 299 neb. 612 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 4514780 299 neb. 612 westwood v. darnell qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/westwood-v-darnell-4292033"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2672048-2672048",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2672048",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "DAVID R. SEATON ET AL. v. WISE PROPERTIES-TN",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "356 S.W.3d 384",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 9,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2672048 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues 356 s.w.3d 384 david r. seaton et al. v. wise properties-tn qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2672048-2672048"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-2681071-2681071",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 2681071",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "ET AL. v. SOVEREIGN GRACE MINISTRIES",
      "extracted_docket_number": "shall be treated as filed on the same day as",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "446 U.S. 1",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 9,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 2681071 us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues shall be treated as filed on the same day as 446 u.s. 1 et al. v. sovereign grace ministries qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-2681071-2681071"
    },
    {
      "slug": "don-carmichael-v-julie-carmichael-3354555",
      "title": "Don Carmichael v. Julie Carmichael",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Don Carmichael v. Julie Carmichael",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3359023/carmichael-v-carmichael-no-fa91-0115017-s-jan-31-1995/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3359023",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-01-31",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 9,
      "search_terms": "don carmichael v. julie carmichael us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3359023 don carmichael v. julie carmichael qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/don-carmichael-v-julie-carmichael-3354555"
    },
    {
      "slug": "janet-l-lavallee-v-richard-a-lavallee-3342083",
      "title": "Janet L. Lavallee v. Richard A. Lavallee.",
      "citation": "QDRO",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "Janet L. Lavallee v. Richard A. Lavallee.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3346567/lavallee-v-lavallee-no-43975-s-jul-23-1992/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3346567",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1992-07-23",
      "citation_year": 1992,
      "plan_legal_category": "QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 9,
      "search_terms": "janet l. lavallee v. richard a. lavallee. us qdro procedure / domestic relations order issues courtlistener.com 3346567 janet l. lavallee v. richard a. lavallee. qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 5,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/janet-l-lavallee-v-richard-a-lavallee-3342083"
    },
    {
      "slug": "bd-of-trustees-of-the-n-d-public-employees-retirement-system-v-n-d-9880808",
      "title": "Bd. of Trustees of The N.D. Public Employees' Retirement System v. N.D.",
      "citation": "2023 ND 185",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Bd. of Trustees of The N.D. Public Employees' Retirement System v. N.D.",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2023 ND 185",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9428951/bd-of-trustees-of-the-nd-public-employees-retirement-system-v-nd/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "9428951",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2023-09-28",
      "citation_year": 2023,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "bd. of trustees of the n.d. public employees' retirement system v. n.d. 2023 nd 185 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 9428951 2023 nd 185 bd. of trustees of the n.d. public employees' retirement system v. n.d. qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/bd-of-trustees-of-the-n-d-public-employees-retirement-system-v-n-d-9880808"
    },
    {
      "slug": "conservatorship-of-the-estate-of-ida-mcqueen-fessha-taye-as-conservator-etc-plaintiff-and",
      "title": "Conservatorship of the Estate of IDA McQUEEN. FESSHA TAYE, as Conservator, Etc., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CAROL VERES REED, Defendant and Appellant",
      "citation": "59 Cal. 4th 602",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Conservatorship of the Estate of IDA McQUEEN. FESSHA TAYE, as Conservator, Etc., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CAROL VERES REED, Defendant and Appellant",
      "extracted_docket_number": "S209376 Date",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "59 Cal. 4th 602",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2682037/conservatorship-of-mcqueen/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "2682037",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2014-07-07",
      "citation_year": 2014,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "post_judgment_enforcement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "conservatorship of the estate of ida mcqueen. fessha taye, as conservator, etc., plaintiff and respondent, v. carol veres reed, defendant and appellant 59 cal. 4th 602 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 2682037 s209376 date 59 cal. 4th 602 conservatorship of the estate of ida mcqueen. fessha taye, as conservator, etc., plaintiff and respondent, v. carol veres reed, defendant and appellant qualified_domestic_relations_order post_judgment_enforcement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/conservatorship-of-the-estate-of-ida-mcqueen-fessha-taye-as-conservator-etc-plaintiff-and"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-1418413-1418413",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 1418413",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 1418413",
      "extracted_docket_number": "COA02-1722",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 1418413 us family-law retirement/property division context coa02-1722 qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-1418413-1418413"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3350508-3350508",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3350508",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3350508",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3350508 us family-law retirement/property division context qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3350508-3350508"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3713457-3713457",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3713457",
      "citation": "domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3713457",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "domestic relations order",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3713457 domestic relations order us family-law retirement/property division context domestic relations order qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3713457-3713457"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-3754161-3754161",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 3754161",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 3754161",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 3754161 us family-law retirement/property division context qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-3754161-3754161"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4353020-4353020",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4353020",
      "citation": "qualified domestic relations order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4353020",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": null,
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4353020 us family-law retirement/property division context qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4353020-4353020"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-4710326-4710326",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 4710326",
      "citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 4710326",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1056(d)(3)",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "pension / defined benefit issues",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "erisa",
        "pension",
        "401k",
        "post_judgment_enforcement",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 4710326 1056(d)(3) us pension / defined benefit issues 1056(d)(3) qualified_domestic_relations_order erisa pension 401k post_judgment_enforcement beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-4710326-4710326"
    },
    {
      "slug": "in-re-the-marriage-of-gloria-bonita-boyer-and-larry-charles-boyer-upon-the-petition-of-glo",
      "title": "In Re the MARRIAGE OF Gloria Bonita BOYER and Larry Charles Boyer. Upon the Petition of Gloria Bonita Boyer, Appellee, and Concerning Larry Charles Boyer, Appellant",
      "citation": "538 N.W.2d 293",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "In Re the MARRIAGE OF Gloria Bonita BOYER and Larry Charles Boyer. Upon the Petition of Gloria Bonita Boyer, Appellee, and Concerning Larry Charles Boyer, Appellant",
      "extracted_docket_number": "94-213. Supreme",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "538 N.W.2d 293",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1243673/in-re-the-marriage-of-boyer/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "1243673",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "1995-09-20",
      "citation_year": 1995,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "in re the marriage of gloria bonita boyer and larry charles boyer. upon the petition of gloria bonita boyer, appellee, and concerning larry charles boyer, appellant 538 n.w.2d 293 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 1243673 94-213. supreme 538 n.w.2d 293 in re the marriage of gloria bonita boyer and larry charles boyer. upon the petition of gloria bonita boyer, appellee, and concerning larry charles boyer, appellant qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/in-re-the-marriage-of-gloria-bonita-boyer-and-larry-charles-boyer-upon-the-petition-of-glo"
    },
    {
      "slug": "jordana-elrom-v-elad-elrom-2781188",
      "title": "Jordana Elrom v. Elad Elrom",
      "citation": "439 N.J. Super. 424",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Jordana Elrom v. Elad Elrom",
      "extracted_docket_number": "A-4565-12T4 JORDANA ELROM",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "439 N.J. Super. 424",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2781188/jordana-elrom-v-elad-elrom/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "2781188",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2015-02-23",
      "citation_year": 2015,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "jordana elrom v. elad elrom 439 n.j. super. 424 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 2781188 a-4565-12t4 jordana elrom 439 n.j. super. 424 jordana elrom v. elad elrom qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/jordana-elrom-v-elad-elrom-2781188"
    },
    {
      "slug": "macomber-v-macomber-2258318",
      "title": "MacOmber v. MacOmber",
      "citation": "814 A.2d 456",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "MacOmber v. MacOmber",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "814 A.2d 456",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2258318/macomber-v-macomber/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "2258318",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2003-01-07",
      "citation_year": 2003,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "macomber v. macomber 814 a.2d 456 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 2258318 814 a.2d 456 macomber v. macomber qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/macomber-v-macomber-2258318"
    },
    {
      "slug": "ritter-v-ritter-10597723",
      "title": "Ritter v. Ritter",
      "citation": "2024 ND 147",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Ritter v. Ritter",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20240041",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2024 ND 147",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10131122/ritter-v-ritter/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "10131122",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2024-07-18",
      "citation_year": 2024,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "ritter v. ritter 2024 nd 147 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 10131122 20240041 2024 nd 147 ritter v. ritter qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/ritter-v-ritter-10597723"
    },
    {
      "slug": "the-ministers-and-missionaries-benefit-board-interpleader-plaintiff-v-leon-snow-et-al-appe",
      "title": "The Ministers and Missionaries Benefit Board, Interpleader Plaintiff, v. Leon Snow Et Al., Appellants. Estate of Clark Flesher Et Al., Respondents",
      "citation": "26 N.Y.3d 466",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "The Ministers and Missionaries Benefit Board, Interpleader Plaintiff, v. Leon Snow Et Al., Appellants. Estate of Clark Flesher Et Al., Respondents",
      "extracted_docket_number": null,
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "26 N.Y.3d 466",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3162524/the-ministers-and-missionaries-benefit-board-v-leon-snow-v-the-estate-of/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "3162524",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2015-12-15",
      "citation_year": 2015,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "beneficiary_dispute"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "the ministers and missionaries benefit board, interpleader plaintiff, v. leon snow et al., appellants. estate of clark flesher et al., respondents 26 n.y.3d 466 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 3162524 26 n.y.3d 466 the ministers and missionaries benefit board, interpleader plaintiff, v. leon snow et al., appellants. estate of clark flesher et al., respondents qualified_domestic_relations_order beneficiary_dispute",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 5,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/the-ministers-and-missionaries-benefit-board-interpleader-plaintiff-v-leon-snow-et-al-appe"
    },
    {
      "slug": "the-people-plaintiff-and-respondent-v-catherine-thompson-defendant-and-appellant-4103812",
      "title": "The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CATHERINE THOMPSON, Defendant and Appellant",
      "citation": "1 Cal. 5th 1043",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CATHERINE THOMPSON, Defendant and Appellant",
      "extracted_docket_number": "1 and No. 4 would be excluded. According to the trial",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "1 Cal. 5th 1043",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4326551/people-v-thompson/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4326551",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2016-12-01",
      "citation_year": 2016,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "the people, plaintiff and respondent, v. catherine thompson, defendant and appellant 1 cal. 5th 1043 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 4326551 1 and no. 4 would be excluded. according to the trial 1 cal. 5th 1043 the people, plaintiff and respondent, v. catherine thompson, defendant and appellant qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/the-people-plaintiff-and-respondent-v-catherine-thompson-defendant-and-appellant-4103812"
    },
    {
      "slug": "willprecht-v-willprecht-4661340",
      "title": "Willprecht v. Willprecht",
      "citation": "2021 ND 17",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Willprecht v. Willprecht",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20200195",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "2021 ND 17",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4857561/willprecht-v-willprecht/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4857561",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2021-02-18",
      "citation_year": 2021,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "present_value"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 8,
      "search_terms": "willprecht v. willprecht 2021 nd 17 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 4857561 20200195 2021 nd 17 willprecht v. willprecht qualified_domestic_relations_order present_value",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 5,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/willprecht-v-willprecht-4661340"
    },
    {
      "slug": "american-coatings-association-plaintiff-and-appellant-v-south-coast-air-quality-management",
      "title": "AMERICAN COATINGS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent",
      "citation": "54 Cal. 4th 446",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "AMERICAN COATINGS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent",
      "extracted_docket_number": "S177823 Date",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "54 Cal. 4th 446",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/844186/american-coatings-assn-v-south-coast-air-quality-management-district/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "844186",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2012-06-25",
      "citation_year": 2012,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 5,
      "search_terms": "american coatings association, plaintiff and appellant, v. south coast air quality management district, defendant and respondent 54 cal. 4th 446 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 844186 s177823 date 54 cal. 4th 446 american coatings association, plaintiff and appellant, v. south coast air quality management district, defendant and respondent qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/american-coatings-association-plaintiff-and-appellant-v-south-coast-air-quality-management"
    },
    {
      "slug": "barry-s-jameson-plaintiff-and-appellant-v-taddese-desta-defendant-and-respondent-4291703",
      "title": "Barry S. JAMESON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Taddese DESTA, Defendant and Respondent.",
      "citation": "234 Cal. Rptr. 3d 831",
      "citation_is_placeholder": false,
      "display_name": "Barry S. JAMESON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Taddese DESTA, Defendant and Respondent.",
      "extracted_docket_number": "of commentators pointed out that the",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "234 Cal. Rptr. 3d 831",
      "source_url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4514450/jameson-v-desta/",
      "source_host": "courtlistener.com",
      "source_opinion_id": "4514450",
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": "2018-07-05",
      "citation_year": 2018,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order",
        "public_employee_retirement"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 5,
      "search_terms": "barry s. jameson, plaintiff and appellant, v. taddese desta, defendant and respondent. 234 cal. rptr. 3d 831 us family-law retirement/property division context courtlistener.com 4514450 of commentators pointed out that the 234 cal. rptr. 3d 831 barry s. jameson, plaintiff and appellant, v. taddese desta, defendant and respondent. qualified_domestic_relations_order public_employee_retirement",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/barry-s-jameson-plaintiff-and-appellant-v-taddese-desta-defendant-and-respondent-4291703"
    },
    {
      "slug": "courtlistener-opinion-897409-897409",
      "title": "CourtListener opinion 897409",
      "citation": "Qualified Domestic Relations Order",
      "citation_is_placeholder": true,
      "display_name": "CourtListener opinion 897409",
      "extracted_docket_number": "20030339",
      "extracted_reporter_citation": "671 N.W.2d 780",
      "source_url": null,
      "source_host": null,
      "source_opinion_id": null,
      "court": null,
      "jurisdiction": "US",
      "state_code": null,
      "date_published": null,
      "citation_year": null,
      "plan_legal_category": "family-law retirement/property division context",
      "topic_terms": [
        "qualified_domestic_relations_order"
      ],
      "relevance_total": 5,
      "search_terms": "courtlistener opinion 897409 us family-law retirement/property division context 20030339 671 n.w.2d 780 qualified_domestic_relations_order",
      "strict_qdro_relevance": 1,
      "retirement_division_relevance": 2,
      "family_law_relevance": 2,
      "status": "machine_draft_public_v0",
      "review_status": "gold_label_pending",
      "page_url": "https://lexyalgo.com/corpus/cases/courtlistener-opinion-897409-897409"
    }
  ]
}