21 Conn. Super. Ct. 497 - Lytwinick v. Lytwinick’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
August 2000
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Beadleston v. . Beadleston · Lusas v. St. Patrick's Roman Catholic Church Corp. · Steinmann v. Steinmann · Weisguth v. Supreme Tribe of Ben Hur · McBride v. . McBride
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“there is no doubt that the court should exercise its discretion to restore a case to the docket for further action upon such a motion if rights of the defendant acquired by reasons of such action would be injuriously affected by such withdrawal.”
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.