Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 209 Ark. 505 - Miller v. Miller

Miller v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

1945

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
June 2020
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 2020

1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

60194519501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Sofre Alexander v. Seferino Crollott · Nelson v. Nelson · Schley v. Dodge, Chancellor · Taylor v. Bay St. Francis Drainage District · Williams v. Williams

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

  1. “"In the case of Nelson v. Nelson, 146 Ark. 362 , 225 S.W. 619, 620 , this court said: `It follows also that the allowance of attorney's fees must be reversed. At Section 49 of the article on Alimony in 1 R.C.L., at page 902, the law is announced as follows: `As a general rule, an action for alimony cannot be brought after the rendition of a judgment for divorce, even though the decree is silent on the matter; for, as the question of alimony might, and should, have been litigated therein, such decree operates as res judicata as to the question of alimony.' See, also, 7 R.C.L., p. 792. `The original decree undertakes to settle, and did adjudicate, the marital rights of the parties. The divorce granted was an absolute one, and terminates the husband's liability for his wife's obligations. He would thereafter be no more liable for her lawyer's fees than he would be for any other contractual obligation which she had incurred.' "In American and English Annotated Cases, vol. 40 (Ann.Cas.1916B), page 875, there is an extensive note or annotation on `Doctrine of Res Judicata as Applicable to Divorce Proceedings'; and on page 898 of that annotation, the rule is stated: `All questions concerning alimony which are or ought to be determined in a divorce proceeding are res judicata in a subsequent proceeding in the same jurisdiction.' "See also 17 Am.Juris. 442, 482, 484. "There was no language in the divorce decree of September 25, 1944, reserving the question of alimony for subsequent di”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.