Addison v. Addison’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 126 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 138 later decisions — most recently September 2014 · most notably 16 Cal. 3d 583 - In Re Marriage of Bouquet (1976), 10 Cal. 3d 592 - In Re Marriage of Fithian (1974)
8 federal appellate · 126 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 Williams v. State of North Carolina · Toomer v. Witsell · Johnson v. Stevenson · Hamilton v. Regents of the University of California · 3 Cal. 2d 740 - Union Sugar Co. v. Hollister Estate Co.
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 138 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘Vested rights, of course, may be impaired “with due process of law” under many circumstances. The state’s inherent sovereign power includes the so called “police power” right to interfere with vested property rights whenever reasonably necessary to the protection of the health, safety, morals, and general well being of the people. The annals of constitutional law are replete with decisions approving, as constitutionally proper, the impairing of, and even the complete confiscation of, property rights when compelling public interest justified it. ****** The constitutional question, on principle, therefore, would seem to be, not whether a vested right is impaired by a marital property law change, but whether such a change reasonably could be believed to be sufficiently necessary to the public welfare as to justify the impairment.’ ” 43 Cal.Rptr. at 102 , 399 P.2d at 902 , citing, Armstrong, “Prospective” Application of Changes in Community Property Control — Rules of Property or Constitutional Necessity?, 33 Cal.L.Rev. 476, 495-96 (1945).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Each state as a sovereign has a rightful and legitimate concern in the marital status of persons domiciled within its borders. The marriage relation creates problems of large social importance. Protection of offspring, property interests, and the enforcement of marital responsibilities are but a few of the commanding problems in the field of domestic relations with which the state must deal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sample v. Sample“Nor is the statute being applied retroactively. That is so because the legislation here involved neither creates nor alters rights except upon divorce or separate maintenance. The judgment of divorce was granted after the effective date of the legislation. Hence the statute is being applied prospectively. [Addison v. Addison, supra, 43 Cal. Rptr. at 104 , 399 P. 2d at 904 ]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rothman v. Rothman
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.