Cosgriff v. Cosgriff’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently May 1980
10 state decisions
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 Bryant v. Bryant · 129 Cal. App. 2d 403 - Anderson v. Anderson · Cooper v. Matheny · Eisenbarth v. Eisenbarth · 100 So. 2d 157 - Zalka v. Zalka
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Had the decree provided for a definite sum per child, as often is the case, the payment due would automatically have been reduced when one child reached majority. But, where the provision for support is for a lump sum, we believe the better rule is that which is applied by those courts which require such sum to be paid, in the absence of modification, until the youngest child attains majority. [Citing cases]””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Redman v. Redman
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.