Clark v. Williard’s Empirical Analysis
294 U.S. 211 · 1935
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 3 district · 70 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 194 later decisions (55 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1998 · most notably Williams v. State of North Carolina (1942), Estin v. Estin (1948)
29 federal appellate · 3 district · 70 state decisions — followed in 19 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 Helvering v. Taylor · Gunning v. Cooley · Cole v. Cunningham · Zellerbach Paper Co. v. Helvering · Converse v. Hamilton
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 194 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Every state has jurisdiction to determine for itself the liability of property within its territorial limits to seizure and sale under the process of its courts. * * * “Iowa may say that one who is a liquidator with title, appointed by her statutes, shall be so recognized in Montana with whatever rights and privileges accompany such recognition according to Montana law. For failure to give adherence to that principle, we reversed and remanded when the case was last before us. [ 292 U. S. 112 ( 54 S. Ct. 615 , 78 L. Ed. 1160 ).] Iowa may not say, however, that a liquidator with title who goes into Montana may set at naught Montana law as to the distribution of Montana assets, and carry over into another state the rule of distribution prescribed by the statutes of the domicile.” (Italics our ■own.)”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.