Schaeffer v. Schaeffer’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently March 1998
17 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 Ewing v. Mallison · Craig v. Craig · Graves v. National Mutual Casualty Co. · Schaefer v. Milner · Wible v. Wible
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The general rule is that when a court of competent jurisdiction acquires jurisdiction of the subject matter and of the parties, its jurisdiction continues as to all matters therein involved until the issues are finally disposed of, and no court of co-ordinate jurisdiction should interfere with its action. (Schaefer v. Milner, 156 Kan. 768 , 137 P. 2d 156 ; 14 Am. Jur. 436 , § 243; 21 C. J. S. 745-748; Ewing v. Mallison, 65 Kan. 484 , 70 Pac. 369 ; Juhlin v.. Hutchings, 90 Kan. 618 , 135 Pac. 598 ; Rennolds v. Guthrie, 103 Kan. 829 , 177 Pac. 359 ; Hepner v. Hepner, 115 Kan. 647 , 223 Pac. 1095 ; Bank Savings Life Ins. Co. v. Schroll, 141 Kan. 442 , 41 P. 2d 731 ; Watts v. Watts, 151 Kan. 125 , 98 P. 2d 125 ; Graves v. National Mutual Cas. Co., 164 Kan. 267 , 188 P. 2d 945 .) It is essential to the proper and orderly administration of justice that the observance of the foregoing rule of law be enforced in order to prevent unseemly, expensive, and dangerous conflicts of jurisdiction and of process.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wheeler v. Wheeler · Smith v. State
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.