Byars v. Mixon’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently December 2017
18 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 Maslankowski v. Beam Ex Rel. Quernemeon · Colvin v. State · Woyak v. Konieske · Cox v. United States · Rash v. Bogart
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ . . . We do think it is practicable to assign dower in whole tracts if the widow’s share is allotted so as to provide her with a life interest in one-third of the acreage and value of the land. That is our understanding of the trial court’s order. This would unencumber two-thirds of the land, and would appear to be an equitable solution if it were without manifest injustice to either the widow or the children. That question arises when the assignment is made and is subject to confirmation by the trial court. . . . ” (292 Ala. at 667, 299 So.2d at 266)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bryars v. Wilder““ . . . The trial court rejected appellant’s contention that her dower should be based on the total market value of the land and that she should receive payment of the interest on one-third of that value for the rest of her life. For example — 6% interest on $300,000.00 (Vs of the value) is $18,000.00 per annum, which would consume all but $11,000.00 of the total annual income from the property. This would be manifestly unjust to the children.” Byars v. Mixon, supra, 292 Ala. at 669, 299 So.2d at 268.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bryars v. Wilder“[t]he fact that a question propounded to an expert witness will elicit an opinion from him in practical affirmation or disaffirmation of a material issue in a case will not suffice to render the question improper.”
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.