Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 CAL2D 580 - Reynolds v. Reynolds

Reynolds v. Reynolds’s Empirical Analysis

1943

Citation profile

80
cited by 80 later decisions
8
states following
May 2008
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 76 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently May 2008 · most notably 38 Cal. 2d 676 - Lerner v. Superior Court (1952), 232 Cal. App. 2d 56 - Colvig v. RKO General, Inc. (1965)

2 federal appellate · 76 state decisions

3001943195019601970198019902000decided

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 Adam v. Saenger · Michigan Trust Co. v. Ferry · State of Washington Bond Goodwin Tucker v. Superior Court of State of Washington for Spokane County · 9 Cal. 2d 556 - Rosher v. Superior Court · Moore v. Superior Court

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

  1. “established that the Legislature may provide that once the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of a proceeding and over the person of the party affected, it may bind such person by orders made after he has left the state.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “After appearance in an action a defendant or his attorney is entitled to notice of all subsequent proceedings of which notice is required to be given.... "... A client may of course discharge his attorney at any time ..., but during the course of a proceeding service of papers on the attorney of record, where service upon the attorney is proper, binds the client until the attorney is discharged or substituted out of the case in the manner provided by law.... The court is concerned in such cases not with whether the client is represented by an attorney, but whether he has an attorney of record, whether any change in attorneys has been made [with the client's consent or by court order], and whether notice thereof has been given [to the adverse party].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The authority of an attorney ... ordinarily ends with the entry of judgment, except for the purpose of enforcing it or having it set aside or reversed.... Nevertheless the judgment of divorce insofar as it relates to the custody and maintenance of minor children is not final. As to those matters the litigation must be regarded as still pending .... The attorney of record is the person the client has named as his agent upon whom service of papers may be made.... The burden lay upon the defendant to keep an attorney of record or to make such arrangements for notice with the clerk as he thought advisable.”
    1 later decision 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.