Henderson v. Henderson’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably Guardianship of Smith (1954), Griggs v. Barnes (1955)
3 federal appellate · 20 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 McClaugherty v. McClaugherty · Pretlow v. Pretlow · Withrow v. Edwards · Graham v. Bennet · Dobie v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The issue of marriages decreed null in law, without regard to the ground of nullity are legitimated. They are consequently endowed with all the rights of legitimate issue for all purposes and in their relation with other persons. They are put on a par with children born in lawful wedlock.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Sec. 20-107. Court may decree as to estate and maintenance of parties, and custody of children. — Upon decreeing the dissolution of a marriage, and also upon decreeing a divorce, whether from the bond of matrimony or from bed and board, and upon decreeing that neither party is entitled to a divorce the court may mate such further decree as it shall deem expedient concerning the estate and the maintenance of the parties, or either of them, and the care, custody and maintenance of their minor children, and may determine with which of the parents the children or any of them shall remain, provided, that the court shall have no authority to decree support of children or alimony to continue after the death of the father or husband. * * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Evidently the legislature in enacting section 5111 did not intend to make any distinction between decrees for the dissolution of a marriage and decrees annulling a marriage. * * * The intent was to authorize a court to make such further decree as it might deem expedient in eases pending before it dealing with the severance of the relations of the parties incident to marriage. [Ibid. Emphasis added.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.