Boyles v. Boyles’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
54 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably In re T.R.P. (2006), In Re TRP (2006)
54 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1738
Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Durfee v. Duke · Underwriters National Assurance Company v. North Carolina Life and Accident and Health Insurance Guaranty Association · Griffin v. Griffin
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“power to pass on the merits of the case,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Because a judgment from a rendering court is only entitled to the 'same credit, validity and effect' ... as it had in the [court] where it was pronounced, the judgment from the rendering court must be deemed to have satisfied certain requisites of a valid judgment before full faith and credit will be granted to it.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the rendering court must. . . have respected the demands of due process. That is, the rendering court must. . . have afforded the parties adequate notice and opportunity to be heard before full faith and credit will be accorded the judgment. [I]t follows that when a party against whom a default was entered subsequently challenges the validity of the original proceeding on grounds that he did not receive adequate notice, the reviewing court ordinarily must examine the underlying facts in the record to determine if they support the conclusion that the notice given of the original proceeding was adequate.”
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.