49 Ala. App. 514 - Phillips v. Phillips’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 78 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently July 2015 · most notably 53 Ala. App. 168 - Gamble v. Gamble (1974), 52 Ala. App. 10 - Chancellor v. Chancellor (1974)
2 federal appellate · 78 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 Burch v. Burch · Davis v. Davis · Poteet v. Poteet · Bassett v. Bassett · Sides v. Sides
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"(7) Upon application of either the husband or wife, when the court is satisfied from all the testimony in the case that there exists such a complete incompatibility of temperament that the parties can no longer live together."”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[Ijncompatibility refers to conflicts in personalities and dispositions so deep as to be irreconcilable and to render it impossible for the parties to continue a normal marital relationship with each other. Incompatibility of temperament necessarily involves both parties. While one spouse may have a more normal temperament than the other and the overt acts evidencing incompatibility may come largely from the other spouse, it is inconceivable that a husband’s temperament can be compatible with that of his wife if hers is incompatible with his. (Emphasis supplied.)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““[Tjhis court defined and discussed incompatibility of temperament as a ground for divorce in Alabama, and we do not here need to reiterate what we stated in that opinion. However, in general terms, in Phillips, supra, we defined incompatibility as referring to conflicts in personality and disposition so deep as to be irreconcilable and to render it impossible for the parties to continue a normal marital relationship with each other. We further said that this new ground for divorce in Alabama gives to the trial court additional discretional power and its determination that a divorce should be granted or should not be granted on such ground will only be reversed if such decision is plainly and palpably wrong. “As was stated in Phillips, supra, the trial court, in determining whether or not incompatibility exists, should consider whether or not there is a conflict of personality; whether or not there is mutual concern for the emotional needs of each other; whether the marriage is characterized by financial difficulties, long physical separation, difference of interests, resentment, coolness, distrust and constant bickering; and whether antagonistic feelings exist that are irreversible and demonstrate an irremediable rift.””
2 later decisions 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.