408 So. 2d 523 - McCrary v. McCrary’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
2
states following
April 1995
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 345 So. 2d 316 - McEntire v. McEntire · 366 So. 2d 1132 - Murphree v. Murphree · 392 So. 2d 1194 - Stewart v. Stewart · Jones v. Jones · Hayes v. Hayes
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"This court also holds that the trial court did not err in failing to modify the divorce decree to require the sale of the joint property and division of the proceeds. The divorce decree in this case contained no provision for future support of the wife. The wife was, however, given the possession of the house for her life. The use and benefit of the house must be viewed as payment for the wife's inchoate marital rights and as such is alimony in gross. Durham v. Durham , 336 So.2d 1360 (Ala.Civ.App. 1976). Alimony in gross is not modifiable. McEntire v. McEntire , 345 So.2d 316 (Ala.Civ.App. 1977); Durham v. Durham, supra.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Smith v. Smith
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.