Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 40 Cal. 2d 461 - Smith v. Smith

40 Cal. 2d 461 - Smith v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1953

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
March 1969
most recently cited

12 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Huber v. Huber · Puckett v. Puckett · Adams v. Adams · 25 Cal. 2d 37 - Wells Fargo & Co. v. City & County of San Francisco · 4 Cal. 2d 356 - McClure v. McClure

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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In the present case, however, defendant did not appeal from the interlocutory decree. That decree is now final, and in this proceeding defendant seeks collaterally to attack the provision awarding alimony. Accordingly, we are not concerned with whether the court erred in granting relief inconsistent with the property settlement agreement but only with whether it had jurisdiction to do so.”
    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.