Brown v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably Konvalinka v. Chattanooga-Hamilton County Hospital Authority (2008), Langford v. Langford (1967)
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 48 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 Bryan v. Aetna Life Ins. Co. · 26 Tenn. App. 641 - Hicks v. Hicks · Davenport v. Davenport · Gill v. State · Sartain v. Dixie Coal & Iron Co.
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A distinction must be made in this regard between the mere erroneous exercise of a power granted, and the usurpation of a power where none exists.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“Courts derive their powers to adjudicate not from the parties, but from the law. A Court acting without jurisdiction of the subject matter, or beyond the jurisdiction conferred upon it, is therefore acting without authority of law and its judgments and decrees in so acting are void and bind no one. (Citations omitted.) It necessarily follows therefore that jurisdiction over the subject matter can not be conferred or enlarged by waiver, consent or estoppel.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““(3) Evidently to meet the holdings of some courts that, under the common law, the wife may in some cases be entitled to alimony notwithstanding the husband is granted a divorce for the misconduct of the wife, it is provided by statute in this State that if the husband obtains a divorce the wife is not entitled to alimony. Code, Section 8449. . . . He can invoke it or not as he chooses but he should seasonably assert his rights. (4) . . . We hold that as a matter of simple justice and upon principles of estoppel the contention that alimony should not be allowed because the husband was . . . granted a divorce comes too late and may not be sustained.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Currier v. Currier
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.