Williams v. Anthony’s Empirical Analysis
1929
Citation profile
42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably 486 So. 2d 408 - Hall v. Mazzone (1986), Craig v. Root (1946)
42 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 Sandlin v. Anders · Whitehead v. Boutwell · Leddon v. Strickland · Yarbrough v. Yarbrough · Chandler v. Home Loan Co.
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A bill for the sale of land for division is sufficient to confer jurisdiction if it makes all the tenants parties, ‘shows in a way the interest of each, and which of them are infants, and states that “the property cannot be equitably divided among the several joint owners of the same.” ’ Edwards v. Edwards, 142 Ala. 267, 278 , 39 So. 82 , 86; Foley v. Brock, 173 Ala. 336 , 56 So. 207 ; Chandler v. Home Loan Co., 211 Ala. 80 , 99 So. 723 . There is no demurrer to the bill for the failure to state clearly and fully the interest of each of the parties. It should make a positive statement not a probable one in this respect, but a failure at this point is not jurisdictional. It may-then, in the alternative, and if mistaken as to the interest so stated, allege some other, and different, distinct interest. But the bill is not subject to demurrer for want of equity on account of insufficient averment in this respect.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shaddix v. Wilson
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.