Liles v. Liles’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 120 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 126 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably Johnson v. Johnson (1986), First National Bank of DeWitt v. Cruthis (2005)
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 120 state decisions — followed in 15 states
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 Wilshire Oil Company of Texas v. L. E. Riffe, O. Homer Riffe and Thomas J. Masterson · Day v. Day · 180 N.J. Super. 210 - Amato v. Amato · Hilburn v. First State Bank of Springdale · 132 Ga. App. 714 - Bituminous Casualty Corp. v. J. B. Forrest & Sons, Inc.
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 126 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e have come to the position that unless the chancery court has no tenable nexus whatever to the claim in question we will consider the matter of whether the claim should have been heard there to be one of propriety rather than one of subject matter jurisdiction.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“1. In a proceeding for dissolution ... the court shall set apart to each spouse his non-marital property and shall divide the marital property.... 2.“marital property” means all property acquired by either spouse subsequent to the marriage except: (1) Property acquired by gift, bequest, devise, or descent; (2) Property acquired in exchange for property acquired prior to the marriage or in exchange for property acquired by gift, bequest, devise, or descent; (3) Property acquired by a spouse after a decree of legal separation; (4) Property excluded by valid written agreement of the parties; and (5)The increase in value of property acquired prior to the marriage or pursuant to subdivisions (1) to (4) of this subsection, unless marital assets including labor, have contributed to such increases and then only to the extent of such contributions. 3. All property acquired by either spouse subsequent to the marriage and prior to a decree of legal separation or dissolution of marriage is presumed to be marital property regardless of whether title is held individually or by the spouses in some form of coowner-ship_ The presumption of marital property is overcome by a showing that the property was acquired by a method listed in subsection 2 of this section.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“One who through the tort of another has been required to act in the protection of his interests by bringing or defending an action against a third person is entitled to recover reasonable compensation for loss of time, attorney fees and other expenditures thereby suffered or incurred in the earlier action.”
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.