Cook v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
50 federal appellate · 12 district · 267 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 361 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2019 · most notably Sosna v. Iowa (1975), Sutton v. Leib (1952)
50 federal appellate · 12 district · 267 state decisions — followed in 29 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 Williams v. State of North Carolina · Sherrer v. Sherrer · Adam v. Saenger · Johnson v. Muelberger · 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 361 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * A judgment presumes jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the persons. See Titus v. Wallick, 306 U.S. 282, 287 , 59 S.Ct. 557, 560 , 83 L.Ed. 653 . As stated for the Court by Justice Stone in Adam v. Saenger, 303 U.S. 59, 62 , 58 S.Ct. 454, 456 , 82 L.Ed. 649 , ‘If it appears on its face to be a record of a court of general jurisdiction, such jurisdiction over the cause and the parties is to be presumed unless disproved by extrinsic evidence, or by the record itself.’ ””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * If the defendant spouse appeared in the Florida proceedings and contested the issue of the wife’s domicile * * * of appeared and admitted her Florida domicile * * * or was personally served in the divorce state * * *, he would be barred from attacking the decree collaterally; and so would a stranger to the Florida proceedings, such as respondent, unless Florida applies a less strict rule of res judicata to the second husband than it does to the first. * * * * # * * * * “The Florida decree is entitled to that presumption [that there was jurisdiction over the subject matter and persons]. That presumption may of course be overcome by showing, for example, that Mann never was served in Florida nor made an appearance in the case either generally or specially to contest the jurisdictional issues. * * * ” (Brackets and italics ours.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the burden of undermining the decree of a sister state `rests heavily upon the assailant.'”
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.