Warner v. Warner’s Empirical Analysis
1933
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 1976
2 federal appellate · 4 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 Henderson v. Henderson · Phy v. Phy · Brandt v. Brandt · Andrews v. Andrews
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““After a careful study of the opinions in this state, we conclude that if the allowance to the .plaintiff in the divorce suit was simply for maintenance or alimony and not a settlement of property rights, then, in a proper case, the court in its discretion may set aside or modify the decree for alimony. Andrews v. Andrews, 144 Or. 200 , 24 P. (2nd) 332.” Warner v. Warner, supra, 145, at p. 543.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Prime v. Prime
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.