Mills v. Mills’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably Carpenter v. Carpenter (1982), Conoco, Inc. v. STATE DEPT. OF HEALTH, ETC. (1982)
25 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Relies on Drews v. Maryland · Alabama Public Service Commission v. AAA Motor Lines, Inc. · Glassford v. Glassford · Williams v. Williams · Finley v. Finley
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The purpose of a declaratory judgment is to declare rights not theretofore determined and is not to determine rights previously adjudicated. (Citations omitted). The reasoning appears to be that when a controversy has once been adjudicated by a tribunal having jurisdiction of parties and subject matter, the controversy is no longer an actual one under the declaratory judgment act.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McDowell v. Austin““We hold that since the parties entered into a property settlement negotiated by parties and their attorneys and providing for division of certain properties in less than fee simple estates, that 12 O.S.1971 § 1278 does not apply to render such division void, for such parties have waived their rights to complain and the decree based thereon has long since become final.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Perry v. Perry““An action for declaratory judgment cannot be made a substitute for appeal; if the rule were otherwise, a declaratory proceeding would lie to determine whether a prior declaratory proceeding was erroneous, and there would be no end to that kind of litigation.” 3”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McDowell v. Austin
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.