Epps v. Epps’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 138 state decisions

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

1. ““But, on principle, there is no escape from the conclusion that a decree for alimony in gross, if without reservation, becomes a vested right from the date of its rendition and survives the death of the husband. Differing from a mere periodic allowance for current and continuous support, it is intended to effect a final termination of the property rights and relations of the parties, and is . an approximate appraisal’ of the present value of the wife’s future support, and, in a measure, a compensation for her loss of inchoate property rights in her husband’s homestead and other estate, given to her by statute in case of her survival. Smith v. Smith, 45 Ala. 264, 268 ; Jeter v. Jeter, 36 Ala. 391, 401, 402 ; Winslow v. Winslow, 133 Tenn. 663 , 182 S.W. 241 , Ann.Cas.1917A, 245; Martin v. Martin, 195 Ill.App. 32 ; 19 Corp.Jur. 266, § 613.” [ 215 Ala. 581 , 112 So. 192 .]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Williams v. Williams

2. ““These facts merely confirm the purpose of the decree as implied from its form, one based on future earnings for the continued maintenance of the wife, and hence dependent upon such earnings for payment. There was no error in holding it subject to modification for good cause. But the court went further, and undertook to avoid the installments accrued before the petition to modify was presented. This was beyond his power. These past-due installments had become a debt of record, a vested estate of the wife, beyond the power of the court to destroy, whatever the hardship to the petitioner. His jurisdiction to modify the decree is limited to its prospective effect.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hudson v. Hudson

3. “"A decree providing for monthly payments of $100 per month, to run indefinitely, implies an allowance for support and maintenance to be met by the husband from his income or earnings, if need be. Such a decree is subject to modification on proper application and showing that performance is no longer possible or highly inequitable." ( 218 Ala., at page 669 , 120 So., at page 152 .)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. DuBoise v. DuBoise