Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 657 SW2D 753 - Davis v. Davis

Davis v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
11
states following
January 2013
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently January 2013 · most notably Squeglia v. Squeglia (1995), Frye v. Frye (1986)

36 state decisions — followed in 11 states

1701983199020002010decided

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 Klein v. Klein · 81 Wash. 2d 183 - Freehe v. Freehe · McKelvey v. McKelvey · Johnson v. Johnson · 161 W. Va. 557 - Coffindaffer v. Coffindaffer

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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[W]e have not hesitated to abolish obsolete common-law doctrines. Indeed, we have a special duty to do so where it is the Court, rather than the Legislature, which has recognized and nurtured the action. [W]e abdicate our own function, in a field peculiarly non-statutory, when we refuse to consider an old and court-made rule.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “[0]ur commitment to stare decisis remains strong. Confidence in our courts is to a great extent dependent on the uniformity and consistency engendered by allegiance to stare decisis. However, mindless obedience to this precept can confound the truth and foster an attitude of contempt.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “The trial judge was correct, under the then-existing law, in granting the motion for summary judgment. However, we have decided that the rule applied has been orphaned by logic and reason, and direct that the summary judgment be set aside and the matter remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.