Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 101 SO2D 367 - Epperson v. Epperson

Epperson v. Epperson’s Empirical Analysis

1958

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
January 1997
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently January 1997

22 state decisions

7019581960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Payne v. Superior Court for Providence County · Groover v. Walker · 97 So. 2d 18 - State Ex Rel. Sparks v. Reeves · 62 So. 2d 907 - Cone v. Cone · Eddy v. Stauffer

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"As pointed out by the Supreme Court of Rhode Island in Payne v. Superior Court for Providence County, 1951, 78 R.I. 177 , 80 A.2d 159, 163 , 82 A.2d 167 , the rule (which it related to the law of the case) `is designed to promote the stability of decisions of judges of the same court and to avoid unseemly contests and differences that otherwise might arise among them to the detriment of public confidence in the judicial function.'"”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “We have the view that if the Chancellor who entered the final decree is available and willing to act on a petition for rehearing then the matter should not be acted upon by another judge. However, if the original Chancellor is unable by virtue of death, disability or other equivalent event, or is unwilling by reason of recusation of other cause to consider the rehearing petition, then a successor-Chancellor may consider it under such circumstances. If the petition for rehearing is merely a reargument on points and facts considered by the original Chancellor, then the successor-Chancellor is without authority on such basis to reverse his predecessor. Such a petition for rehearing should be denied.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““In resolving domestic problems there is little substitute for the judgment of an able and experienced Chancellor, who, as here, hears the testimony, views the parties and witnesses and concludes himself on the basis of his direct, personal contact with the litigation.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.