Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 254 Ark. 84 - Welch v. Welch

Welch v. Welch’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
1
states following
October 2012
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently October 2012 · most notably Russell v. Russell (1982), Lytle v. Lytle (1979)

32 state decisions

14019731980199020002010decided

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 National Life & Accident Insurance v. Blanton · Kurtz v. Kurtz · Rie v. Rie · Arnold v. Arnold · Bell v. Bell

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

  1. “. . . testimony of some substantial fact or circumstance independent of the statement of a witness which leads an impartial and reasonable mind to believe that material testimony of that witness is true. Welch v. Welch, supra.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “. . . since it is for the court to say whether the alleged offending spouse is guilty of acts and conduct indicative of settled hate and plain manifestation of alienation and estrangement and whether they have been pursued in a manner and to an extent sufficient to render the complainant’s condition so intolerable as to justify the severance of the marriage bonds, the testimony may not be mere statements of generalities constituting statements of opinions, beliefs and conclusions of the witness, but must be directed toward specific language, acts, and conduct, (cites omitted). Where, however, the testimony of a sole corroborating witness discloses that he knew very little of the material issues, and his statements are based on impressions and hearsay, it will not suffice. Welch v. Welch, supra at 86-87 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “habitual, continuous, permanent and plain manifestation of settled hate, alienation and estrangement on the part of one spouse, sufficient to render the condition of the other intolerable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.