Margaret Williamson v. Katherine Osenton’s Empirical Analysis
232 U.S. 619 · 1914
Citation profile
125 federal appellate · 71 district · 119 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 498 later decisions (14 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2017 · most notably Erie Co v. Tompkins (1938), Williams v. State of North Carolina (1945)
125 federal appellate · 71 district · 119 state decisions — followed in 19 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Mansfield Ry Co v. Swan · Hawes v. Oakland · John Haddock v. Harriet Haddock · Hiram Barber v. Huldah a Barber by Her Next Friend George Cronkhite
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 498 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘ “The essential fact that raises a change of abode to a change of domicile is the absence of any intention to live elsewhere (Story, Conflict of Laws, section 43); or, as Mr. Dicey puts it in his admirable book, ‘The absence of any present intention of not residing permanently or indefinitely in’ the new abode. Confl. L. (2d Ed.) 111””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The very meaning of domicil is the technically pre-eminent headquarters that every person is compelled to have in order that certain rights and duties that have been attached to it by the law may be determined. . . . In its nature it is one, and if in any case two are recognized for different purposes, it is a doubtful anomaly.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“However it may be in England, that in this country a wife in the plaintiff’s circumstances may get a different domicil from that of her husband for purposes of divorce is not disputed and is not open to dispute. Haddock v. Haddock, 201 U.S. 562, 571, 572 [ 50 L. Ed. 867 , 26 Sup. Ct. 525 (1906)].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.