Cassen v. Cassen’s Empirical Analysis
1947
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 56 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently December 1967 · most notably Hare v. General Contract Purchase Corp. (1952), Peugh v. Oliger (1961)
2 federal appellate · 56 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 Williams v. State of North Carolina · Frederick Bell v. Mary G Bell · Andrews v. Andrews · Annie Andrews v. Kate H Andrews · Chapin v. Ford
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Before a person can become a resident of this State so as to have his marital status determined by the courts of this State, he must, in truth and in fact, be a bona fide resident of the State, ... A divorce decree in this State, to fulfill a,ll the requirements for full faith and credit under the United States Constitution, can determine status only when there is a bona fide residence in this State. We quote from § 111 of the American Law Institute’s Restatement of the Law on Conflict of Laws: ‘A state cannot exercise through its courts jurisdiction to dissolve a marriage when neither spouse is domiciled within the state. ’ ’ ’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““So, now, we overrule Squire v. Squire, ( 186 Ark. 511 , 54 S. W. 2d 281 ) supra, insofar as it holds that a person who comes to this state for the purpose of obtaining a divorce and who does not have the animus manendi (which has always been held an essential ingredient of residence), may be said to be a bona fide resident of this state; and by ‘bona fide residence,’ we mean the same as domicile. We quote from, and adopt as our own and as ruling in this state, the language of the United States Supreme Court in Williams v. North Carolina, 325 U. S. 226 , 65 S. Ct. 1092 , 89 L. Ed. 1577 , 157 A. L. R. 1366:”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Oakes v. Oakes
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.