McKee v. Flynt’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably 711 So. 2d 884 - Richard v. Richard (1998), 829 So. 2d 1216 - Boutwell v. Boutwell (2002)
26 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 437 So. 2d 1003 - Albright v. Albright · 614 So. 2d 394 - Smith v. Smith · 453 So. 2d 1294 - Tucker v. Tucker · 480 So. 2d 1120 - Carr v. Carr · 493 So. 2d 952 - Rutland v. Pridgen
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 credibility of the witnesses and the weight of their testimony, as well as the interpretation of evidence where it is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“There must exist some causal connection between the habitual cruel and inhuman treatment and the parties' separation. Fournet v. Fournet, 481 So.2d 326, 329 (Miss.1985). However, application of this rule was limited by Bias v. Bias, 493 So.2d 342, 345 (Miss.1986). Absence of proof of proximate cause does not in logic negate the reality of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment, which may indeed have been a proximate cause of harm to the health and physical well being of the plaintiff (as distinguished from the actual cause of the separation). The chancellor's primary inquiry must in justice be into the ground for divorce. That inquiry requires a dual focus: upon the conduct of the offending spouse and the impact of that conduct upon the plaintiff. If the requisite impact upon plaintiff is proved, there is little reason why we should arbitrarily dismiss because of the proximate cause of separation rule which no legislature has mandated. Bias, 493 So.2d at 345 . See also Faries v. Faries, 607 So.2d 1204, 1209 (Miss. 1992). Bias further holds that acts occurring after the parties have separated may be considered in the charge of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment. Bias, 493 So.2d at 345 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Talbert v. Talbert“[I]t is presumed that the best interests of the child will be preserved by it remaining with its parents or parent. In order to overcome this presumption there must be a clear showing that the parent has (1) abandoned the child, or (2) the conduct of the parent is so immoral {as} to be detrimental to the child, or (3) the parent is unfit mentally or otherwise to have the custody of his or her child.”
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.