Gee v. Gee’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently July 2006 · most notably Hartigan v. Hartigan (1961), Levine v. Levine (1955)
2 federal appellate · 46 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 Ex Parte Weissinger · Martin v. Martin · Jennings v. Jennings · Alabama City G. & A. Ry. Co. v. Bates · Caheen v. Caheen
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““IF DEFENDANT A NONRESIDENT, A YEAR’S RESIDENCE BY PLAINTIFF MUST BE PROVED. — When the defendant is a nonresident, the other party to the marriage must have been a bona fide resident of this state for one year next before the filing of the bill, which must be alleged in the bill and proved; provided however, the provisions of this section shall not be of force and effect when the court has jurisdiction of both parties to the cause of action.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Waite v. Waite · Donnell v. Howell“* * * The court properly overruled the motion to dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. However, the motion was not necessary, because if the proof was not satisfactory that one or both of the parties was a resident citizen of Alabama when the bill was filed, a decree of divorce could not be granted because of the absence of jurisdiction over the subject matter.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is not sufficient to make the allegation [of domicile] without satisfactory proof of such citizenship. . . . There must not only be evidence of such domicile, but it must be sufficient to satisfy the court of the truth in fact of such domicile.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Waite v. Waite
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.