Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 101 U.S. 225 - Jones v. Clifton

Jones v. Clifton’s Empirical Analysis

101 U.S. 225 · 1879

Citation profile

124
cited by 124 later decisions
15
cited 15 times by the Supreme Court
30
states following
September 2005
most recently cited

23 federal appellate · 14 district · 56 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 124 later decisions (15 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2005 · most notably Burnet v. Guggenheim (1933), Coolidge v. Long (1931)

23 federal appellate · 14 district · 56 state decisions — followed in 30 states

31018791880189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Sexton v. Wheaton · Lloyd v. Fulton

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 124 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ The title to the land and policies passed by the deeds; a power only was reserved. That power is not an interest in the property which can be transferred to another, or sold on execution, or. devised! by will. ... Nor is the power a chose in action.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In all cases where a husband makes a voluntary settlement of any portion of his property for the benefit of others Avho stand in such a relation to Mm as to create an obligation, legally or morally, to provide for them, as in the case of a wife, or children, or parents, the only question that can properly be asked is, does such a disposition of the property deprive others of any existing claims to it ? If it does not, no one can complain, if the transfer is made matter of public record and be hot designed as a scheme to defraud future creditors. And it cannot make any difference through what channels the property passes to the party to be benefited, or to his or her trustee, whether it be by direct conveyance from the husband, or through the intervention of others.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The right of a husband to settle a portion of his property upon his wife, and thus provide against the vicissitudes of fortune, when this can be done without impairing existing claims of creditors, is indisputable. Its exercise is upheld by the courts as tending not only to the future comfort and support of the wife, but also, through her, to the support and education of any children of the marriage. It arises, as said by Chief Justice Marshall, in 8exton v. Wheaton, 8 Wheat. 229 , as a consequence of that absolute power which a man possesses over his own property, by which he can .make any disposition of it which does not interfere with'.the existing rights of others.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.