Berry v. Berry’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
March 1978
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Smith v. Smith · Stevens v. Allen · Lepenser v. Griffin · Zinko v. Zinko · Bush v. Bush
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.
““LSA-C.C. Art. 39 provides that a married woman has no other domicile than that of her husband and LSA-C.C. Art. 120 provides that the wife is bound to live with her husband and to follow him wherever he chooses to reside. It is well established, however, that a wife may acquire a domicile separate from that of her husband where she is abandoned or is compelled by reason of ill treatment to leave her husband. Bush v. Bush, 232 La. 747 , 95 So.2d 298 (1957); Juneau v. Juneau, 227 La. 921 , 80 So.2d 864 (1955); Bruno v. Mauro, 205 La. 209 , 17 So.2d 253 (1944); Zinko v. Zinko, 204 La. 478 , 15 So.2d 859 (1943); McGee v. Gasery, 185 La. 839 , 171 So. 49 (1936); Lepenser v. Griffin, 146 La. 584 , 83 So. 839 (1920); Succession of Lasseigne, 143 La. 1095 , 79 So. 873 (1918): George v. George, 143 La. 1032 , 79 So. 832 (1918); State v. Fick, 140 La. 1063 , 74 So. 554 (1917); Stevens v. Allen, 139 La. 658 , 71 So. 936 (1916); Smith v. Smith, 43 La.Ann. 1140 , 10 So. 248 (1891); Authement v. Authement, 254 So.2d 630 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1971); Hickman v. Hickman, 218 So.2d 48 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1969); Landry v. Landry, 192 So.2d 237 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1966). ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ >{< “ * * * It can be seen from a review of the cases cited above that the type of conduct on the part of the husband which constitutes justification for the wife to establish a separate domicile is substantially equivalent to the type of conduct which constitutes grounds for obtaining a separation from bed and board.” Id”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Watts v. Watts“"Under LSA-C.C.P. Art. 3941, an action for separation from bed and board must be brought in a parish where either party is domiciled or in the parish of the last matrimonial domicile. The venue provided in this article may not be waived and a judgment rendered by a court of improper venue is an absolute nullity. The venue requirement of this article, therefore, equates to jurisdiction."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dupuy v. Dupuy
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.