Phillips v. Phillips’s Empirical Analysis
1926
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 2 district · 60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 1997 · most notably United States v. Mitchell (1971), Fernandez v. Wiener (1945)
19 federal appellate · 2 district · 60 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 Warburton v. White · Beals ex rel. Walker v. Ares · Arnett v. Reade · Tourette v. Tourette · Taylor v. Allen
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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a mere expectancy during the marriage . . . . The title of half the community property is vested in the wife the moment it is acquired by the community”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“The husband is the head and master of the partnership or community of gains; he administers its effects, disposes of the revenues which they produce, and may alienate them by an onerous title, without the consent and permission of his wife. P He can make no conveyance inter vivos, by a gratuitous title, of the immovables of the community, nor of the whole, or of a quota of the movables, unless it be for the establishment of the children of the marriage. A gratuitous title within the contemplation of this article embraces all titles wherein there is no direct, material advantage to the donor. P Nevertheless he may dispose of the movable effects by a gratuitous and particular title, to the benefit of all persons. P But if it should be proved that the husband has sold the common property, or otherwise disposed of the same by fraud, to injure his wife, she may have her action against the heirs of her husband, in support of her claim in one-half of the property, on her satisfactorily proving the fraud. (As amended by Acts 1926, No. 96.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“* * * that the wife had not a mere expectancy but the absolute ownership of half of the community property during the existence of the community, subject, of course, to the husband's power of administration.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.