Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2001 OK 87 - Read v. Read

Read v. Read’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
January 2021
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently January 2021

12 state decisions

80200220102020decided

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 North Carolina v. Pearce · Allen v. McCurry · Benton v. Maryland · Illinois v. Vitale · Justices of Boston Municipal Court v. Lydon

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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he terms of 12 O.S.1993 § 1038 provide that a facially void judgment may be vacated at any time. This does not mean. . .that a facially void judgment may be subjected to successive attacks, direct or collateral. Rather, § 1038 merely provides that the passage of time does not operate to bar a quest to vacate a facially void judgment. The law affords no more than a single opportunity to litigate a disputed question of a tribunal's jurisdiction . This "whack" at the divorce decree was taken by Read in his unsuccessful effort to vacate that judgment in 1996. Read appealed that adverse decision and the Court of Civil Appeals, Division Three, affirmed. This court denied certiorari. . . .The trial court's order denying Read's petition to vacate now stands as a complete bar to further attack upon the divorce decree upon the doctrine of res judicata , as well as that of the settled law of the case . The divorce decree's validity is no longer subject to relitigation in the trial court nor is it amendable to review on appeal or certiorari . (Italics in original; underline added.)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties from relitigating not only the adjudicated claim, but also any theories or issues that were actually decided, or could have been decided, in that action.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(al facially void judgment may be attacked at any time; it may be vacated in the very same case in which it was entered or in some collateral proceeding”
    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.