Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 116 Md. 567 - McCaddin v. McCaddin

McCaddin v. McCaddin’s Empirical Analysis

1911

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
2
states following
November 2009
most recently cited

49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently November 2009 · most notably Dickey v. Dickey (1928), Emerson v. Emerson (1913)

49 state decisions

1701911192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Chappell v. Chappell · Wallingsford v. Wallingsford · Stewart v. Stewart · Taylor v. Taylor

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

  1. “"When, therefore, this decree provided for the payment of so much a week as permanent alimony, it was subject to the limitations fixed by law, and could only continue during the joint lives of the husband and wife, while they live apart. There has been some diversity of opinion between the Courts of different jurisdictions as to how far a final decree, allowing permanent alimony, can be modified after the decree has become enrolled, but in this case there can be no difficulty. These parties have not been divorced, either a mensa et thoro or a vinculo matrimonii, but, being separated under such circumstances as to require the husband to support the wife, provision for her support is made, but only while they are so separated....” (Emphasis supplied.)”
    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.