Starling v. Starling’s Empirical Analysis
1951
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
March 1967
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Melson v. Melson · Phinizy v. Phinizy · Butler v. Butler · Sanders v. Sanders · Parks v. Parks
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * Rather than showing the abandonment of appellee by his wife to have been without fault on his part, one of the constituents to justify a favorable decree, the exhibit, unexplained by proper allegations to avert such a con struction, shows that the separation was by mutual agreement or consent. If such were the circumstances of the separation, neither party would be entitled to a divorce on the asserted ground. (Authorities cited.)” (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mangham v. Mangham
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.