Estes v. Estes’s Empirical Analysis
1941
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably United States Lines, Inc. v. United States (1972), Fortson v. Fortson (1943)
2 federal appellate · 35 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 Yarborough v. Yarborough · Carlton v. Carlton · Marietta Chair Co. v. Henderson · Coffee v. Coffee · Wise v. Wise
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an alimony judgment in its usual and accepted form not only adjudges that the husband is liable for the continued support of his wife, and the amount of such support, but, unlike ordinary judgments for money, goes further and expressly commands the husband to pay said sums to the wife. See 2 Schouler on Marriage, Divorce, etc., § 1835; 2 Bishop on Marriage, Divorce, etc., § 1715; McIntyre's Georgia Forms, 844. Cf. Code, § 30-117. Accordingly, a failure to pay the amounts fixed by such judgment is not a mere omission to pay sums adjudicated to be due, but constitutes a violation of the express order of the court that the defendant pay said sums to the wife, . . . Although the judgment is in fact for the recovery of money, the process of attachment is allowed on the theory that it is not for the enforcement of a mere debt but of a continuing duty of the husband to support his wife, in which society has a substantial interest. Lewis v. Lewis, [ 80 Ga. 706 ( 6 SE 918 , 12 ASR 281)].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It will be found well settled in the authorities, and for that matter not disputed by counsel, that a husband and wife may legally contract in settlement of the wife’s claim for alimony, and that the court has ample power to enter a judgment in the terms of such an agreement. [Citations omitted]. Consent judgments, including those for alimony, have been uniformly recognized in this State, and have been given the same force and effect as judgments rendered in due course of litigation upon findings by a jury. [Citations omitted], “It is no objection to a decree, that it was rendered by consent.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hemphill v. Hemphill“on the theory that it is not for the enforcement of a mere debt but of a continuing duty of the husband to support his wife, in which society has a substantial interest. [Cit.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Eickhoff v. Eickhoff
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.