Gold v. Gold’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently July 2006 · most notably Scheinin v. Scheinin (1952), Thomas v. Thomas (1982)
31 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 Dougherty v. Dougherty · Marshall v. Marshall · Schriver v. Schriver · Lickle v. Boone · Miller v. Miller
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“its ordinary equity jurisdiction but as a divorce court... governed by the rules and principles established in the ecclesiastical courts of England so far as they are consistent with the provisions of the Maryland Code.” Id., 33 Md. App. at 417-18, 356 A.2d at 576 -77 (quoting Gold v. Gold, 191 Md. 533, 537 , 62 A.2d 540, 542 (1948)). We have no occasion here to consider retreating from that statement, but subsequent happenings require an addition to its last clause:”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Winston v. Winston
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.