Blumenthal v. Blumenthal’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently August 2005
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 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 Gloth v. Gloth · Klepinger v. Rhodes · Schneider v. Schneider · Chiarodit v. Chiarodit · Boggs v. Boggs
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“§ 11-762. Jurisdiction. 7 "The Domestic Relations Branch [of the Municipal Court] and each judge sitting therein shall have exclusive jurisdiction over * * * civil actions to enforce support of minor children * * *.; 3 determinations and adjudications of property rights, both real and personal, in any action hereinabove referred to in this section, irrespective of any jurisdictional limitation imposed on the Municipal Court for the District of Columbia * * *. 8 "§ 11-763. Power of Court to effectuate purposes for which created. 9 "(a) The Domestic Relations Branch is hereby vested with so much of the power as is now vested in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, whether in law or in equity, as is necessary to effectuate the purposes of this chapter, including but not limited to, the power to issue restraining orders, injunctions, * * * and all * * * writs, orders, and decrees.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It requires no citation of authority for the propositions that the father has a legal obligation to support his minor children; that neither parent, by agreement of their own, can oust the jurisdiction of the court to award a larger amount than agreed upon, and that the court, in arriving at its decision, will be governed by the present needs of the children and the father’s ability to provide for them.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Alves v. Alves
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.