Halmu v. Halmu’s Empirical Analysis

1945

Citation profile

cited by 42 later decisions

states following

July 2009

most recently cited

38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently July 2009 · most notably 67 Wis. 2d 435 - Miller v. Miller (1975), Courtney v. Courtney (1947)

38 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 Reynolds v. Reynolds · Dovi v. Dovi · Sides v. Pittman · Lowry v. Lowry · Boehler v. Boehler

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.

“"The purpose of the order in this case was the support of the minor children. This purpose has been accomplished, and the matter of the care and custody of the minor children is finally disposed of. The force and life of the order expired on the date the youngest child attained majority. It makes no difference whether the one directed to pay has fully complied with such order or not, insofar as enforcing same by contempt proceedings. We hold, therefore, that the trial court does not have jurisdiction to enforce its order to pay child support by contempt proceedings on accrued unpaid installments commenced after the child has reached majority."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. 150 Wis. 2d 123 - In Re Paternity of PJW · 245 So. 2d 896 - Wilkes v. Revels
““The purpose of the order in this case was the support of the minor children. * * * The force and life of the order expired on the date the youngest child attained majority. * * * We hold, therefore, that the trial court does not have jurisdiction to enforce its order to pay child support by contempt proceedings on accrued unpaid installments commenced after the child has reached majority.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. McCullough v. McCullough · State v. Hamilton
““* * * While the portions of the divorce judgment in this case requiring the payment of support money were subject to change and modification during the minority of the children the divorce court for reasons heretofore outlined completely lost jurisdiction at majority to deal with the amounts due and these became fixed and beyond the control of the court. The judgment and its various amendments fixed defendant’s duty to pay sums certain in money and the amount due is arrived at by a computation based upon the record.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. Knipfer v. Buhler

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.