Andrew v. Andrew’s Empirical Analysis
1889
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently July 2014 · most notably In Re CW (1999), Leonard v. Willcox (1928)
32 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 Campbell v. Campbell · Wightman v. Wightman · Lyon v. Lyon · Buckminster v. Buckminster · Ex parte Perkins
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But alimony, or an allowance in the nature of alimony, has been repeatedly held to be not a debt within the meaning of provisions prohibiting imprisonment for debt. Sheafe v. Sheafe, 36 N. H. 155; Ex parte Perkins, 18 Cal. 60 ; Pain v. Pain, 80 N. C. 322 ; Wightman v. Wightman, 45 Ill. 167 . Alimony is decreed to the wife as a provision for future support. 'The right grows out of the domestic relations of the parties. It is the duty of the husband to support the wife. That duty does not cease upon the dissolution of the marriage for his misconduct. It is the duty of the father to provide for his children. He is not relieved from that duty when their custody is given to the mother. The court is therefore authorized to decree to the wife so much of the estate of the husband, or such sum of money to be paid in lieu thereof, as it deems just. The decree is not because of an indebtedness, but is on the ground of personal duty. It may be varied from time to time, as the measure of the duty varies with the conduct or circumstances of the parties. Campbell v. Campbell, 37 Wis. 206 ; Buckminster v. Buckminster, 38 Vt. 248 , ( 88 Am. Dec. 652 ). It is evident that this is something more than the mere ascertainment of an amount due, which the petitioner is at liberty to collect if she can. It is an assignment of property which the court undertakes to put her in possession of. The money is to be paid by the petitionee in lieu of a part of his estate. The decree is in its nature specific”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Irish“the authority to make the order carries with it the power to enforce it”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re CW
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.