Matson v. Matson’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently December 2021
13 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 Williams v. State of North Carolina · Sherrer v. Sherrer · Hiram Barber v. Huldah a Barber by Her Next Friend George Cronkhite · Sistare v. Sistare · Coe v. Coe
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A copy of any foreign judgment * * * may be filed in the office of the clerk of any district court of this state. The clerk shall treat the foreign judgment in the same manner as a judgment of any district court or the supreme court of this state. A judgment so filed has the same effect and is subject to the same procedures, defenses and proceedings for reopening, vacating, or staying as a judgment of a district court or the supreme court of this state and may be enforced and satisfied in like manner.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Because defendant, although served, did not appear in the proceedings resulting in the Wisconsin judgment and did not litigate the jurisdictional issue, he is not bound on that issue by the doctrine of res judicata. Compare Williams v. North Carolina, 325 U.S. 226 , 65 S.Ct. 1092 , 89 L.Ed. 1577 (1945) with Sherrer v. Sherrer, 334 U.S. 343 , 68 S.Ct. 1087 , 92 L.Ed. 1429 (1948) and Coe v. Coe, 334 U.S. 378 , 68 S.Ct. 1094, 92 L.Ed. 1451 (1948). A collateral attack on the Wisconsin judgment on the ground that the Wisconsin Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction is thus available to the defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Defendant is actually arguing that the circuit court exceeded its authority once it exercised subject matter jurisdiction. Although this argument goes beyond the jurisdictional issues before this court on appeal, we note in passing that the amendment authorizing money judgments for past due support installments was effective for all proceedings commenced after February 1, 1978. Act of Oct. 21, c. 105, § 62, 1977 Wis.Laws 560, 579.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Matson v. Matson
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.