Snyder v. Snyder’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

40 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The rule of law in this particular is stated in 1 Ruling Case Law, page 948, as follows: “ ‘Authority to modify the allowance, however, does not include the right to alter the award upon the state of case existing when the decree was entered, or to review the action of the chancellor therein. The parties had their day in court, with the right of appeal if the decree was deemed erroneous, and it cannot be supposed that it was intended that the court should sit in review of its own decrees, or that the same or some succeeding chancellor presiding in the same court should, after the lapse of indefinite time, have power to reverse, alter or modify a decree for alimony upon the facts existing at the time of its entry. ’ See, also, to the same effect, 19 C.J. 273. This rule is followed by the District Court of Appeal in Molema v. Molema, 103 Cal.App. 79 [ 283 P. 956 ]. See also, a case directly in point decided by the Supreme Court of the state of Idaho, Simpson v. Simpson, 51 Idaho 99 [ 4 P.2d 345 ].””

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

2. “would be incongruous to allow an appealable order to become final and yet to concede the power of a court at a later date, upon the same state of facts, to issue an order nullifying it”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 48 Cal. 2d 259 - Bratnober v. Bratnober