Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 409 Mass. 727 - Barry v. Barry

Barry v. Barry’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
July 2010
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2010

8 state decisions

50199120002010decided

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 Knox v. Remick · Gottsegen v. Gottsegen · 18 Mass. App. Ct. 85 - Dominick v. Dominick · 20 Mass. App. Ct. 768 - Slaughter v. McVey · Cepek v. Cepek

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

  1. ““The wife, represented by competent counsel, accepted the terms of the separation agreement, knowing that she would not be entitled to alimony once her former husband attained the age of sixty-five. A decision allowing the wife to reopen the alimony question in this case would mean that the provisions of a separation agreement incorporated in, but also surviving, a judgment of divorce would be open to reconsideration for years (perhaps for the lives of the parties) unless it were clear on the record that the judge who granted the divorce had explicitly ruled that the agreement was fair and reasonable. Such an opportunity would permit requests for modification based on the possibility, however remote, of success and would burden judges with the need to find facts related to events often long past.” Barry v. Barry , 409 Mass, at 733.”
    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.