Stephenson v. Stephenson’s Empirical Analysis
1945
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently May 2011
1 federal appellate · 8 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 Griffin v. Culp · Balbridge v. Smith · Tousley v. Galena Mining & Smelting Co. · Howard v. First Nat. Bank · Slemp v. City of Tulsa
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Though, as he contends, there was no service of summons upon him, he could and did file his cross-petition seeking a divorce and custody of his infant daughter. By so doing he instituted a cause of action as he had a right to do. The provision of 12 O. S. 1941 §226 became applicable to him in the prosecution of his cross-petition. . . . By filing his cross-petition the minor defendant invoked the jurisdiction of the court over his person. . . . He was in court for all purposes of the action, and therefore the judgment, like a judgment entered against a minor properly served, is at most voidable and maintains until set aside or modified in an appropriate proceeding.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hockett v. Vaughan
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.