Davis v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
305 U.S. 32 · 1938
Citation profile
165 federal appellate · 59 district · 297 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 665 later decisions (39 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Allen v. McCurry (1980), Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp. (1982)
165 federal appellate · 59 district · 297 state decisions — followed in 37 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedDavis v. Davis (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Baldwin v. Ionwa State Traveling Men's Ass'n · John Haddock v. Harriet Haddock · Hiram Barber v. Huldah a Barber by Her Next Friend George Cronkhite · Andrews v. Andrews
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 665 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[J]udicial proceedings [of any court of any State] shall have the same full faith and credit in every court within the United States and its Territories and Possessions as they have by law or usage in the courts of such State....”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““As to petitioner’s domicil for divorce and his standing to invoke jurisdiction of the Virginia court, its finding that he was a bona fide resident of that State for the required time is binding upon respondent in the courts of the District. She may not say that he was not entitled to sue for divorce in the state court, for she appeared there and by plea put in issue his allegation as to domicil, introduced evidence to show it false, took exceptions to the commissioner’s report, and sought to have the court sustain them and uphold her plea. Plainly, the determination of the decree upon that point is effective for all purposes in this litigation. Baldwin v. Iowa State Traveling Men’s Ass’n, 283 U.S. 522, 525, 526 , 51 S.Ct. 517, 518 , 75 L.Ed. 1244 .””
2 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.