Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 119 Colo. 278 - Read v. Read

Read v. Read’s Empirical Analysis

1949

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
7
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently December 2018

20 state decisions

5019491950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Elder v. . Rosenwasser · Morris v. Palmer · Munson v. Washband · Warner & Ryan v. Heiden · Bauer v. Abrahams

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

  1. ““The term ‘necessaries’ is incapable of exact definition; its meaning is variable, depending upon the circumstances, financial and otherwise, of the parties.””
    3 later decisions 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.