Davis v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1951
Citation profile
38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently November 1992 · most notably Horsley v. Horsley (1973), 485 So. 2d 1174 - Lutz v. Lutz (1986)
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 Johnson v. Muelberger · Taylor v. Taylor · Whitman v. Whitman · Steiner v. Steiner · King v. Kent's Heirs
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““As preliminary to the discussion, however, we should like to first refer to the general principle that the humane instincts of civilized society are against supercritical legal technicalities which would bastardize children and when a decree of divorce is rendered, another marriage contracted and children born, it is against public policy to vacate the decree if such an order would render innocent parties guilty of bigamy and their children illegitimate. — Fairclough v. St. Amand, 217 Ala. 19 , 114 So. 472 ; Karren v. Karren, 25 Utah 87 , 69 P. 465 , 60 L.R.A. 294 . We therefore must approach a decision of the question with this declared public policy in mind and if the record is susceptible of two interpretations, the burden being on the appellee to establish the invalidity of the prior divorce, as well as the nullity of his own marriage, we will accept the interpretation which would sustain that public policy and the validity of the subsequent marriage, if at all plausible from the recorded proof.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The granting of alimony, including the allowance of attorneys’ fees, is, of course, within the sound judicial discretion of the court to be regulated by many factors, such as the husband’s ability to pay, the wife’s station in life, her financial worth and income, the nature of the conduct of the respective parties, etc. — Russell v. Russell, 247 Ala. 284 , 24 So.2d 124 ; Steiner v. Steiner, 254 Ala. 260 , 48 So.2d 184 ; Morgan v. Morgan, 203 Ala. 516 , 84 So. 754 ; Phillips v. Phillips, 221 Ala. 455 , 129 So. 3 ; Code 1940, Title 34, §§ 32, 33. . . .” Davis v. Davis, 255 Ala. 488, 493 , 51 So.2d 876, 880 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Horsley v. Horsley
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.