Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 76 U.S. 743 - Walker v. Walker's

Walker v. Walker's’s Empirical Analysis

76 U.S. 743 · 1870

Citation profile

86
cited by 86 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
23
states following
October 1990
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 12 district · 47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 86 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1990 · most notably Security Trust Company v. Black River National Bank of Lowville (1902), Zouck v. Zouck (1990)

19 federal appellate · 12 district · 47 state decisions — followed in 23 states

1901870188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Nichols v. Palmer

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

  1. ““It is insisted Hie obligation of the trust was discharged when the wife returned to her husband’s house, but this is a mistaken view of the effect of the instrument. It was the intention of the parties that the arrangement should be permanent, and, to accomplish that purpose, the agreement was framed so that the wife should enjoy her separate estate during life, although she should subsequently become reconciled to her husband and cohabit with him. We can see no valid objection to such a provision, and it is certainly supported by authority [citing Wilson v. Mushett, 3 Barn. & Adol. 743; Bell, Husb. & Wife, 525-541], The husband had a right to make a settlement upon his wife without any view to separation, and the insertion of this provision shows that he. did not intend the settlement to cease on the return of the wife to cohabitation. There is no good reason why effect should not be given to the intention of the parties on the subject. If, on grounds of public* policy, it is desirable that the parties should be reconciled, whatever tends to promote such a. result will receive the favorable consideration of a court of equity.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The Circuit Courts of the United States, with full equity powers, have jurisdiction over executors and administrators, where the parties are citizens of different states, and will enforce the same rules in the adjustment of claims against them that the local courts administer in favor of their own citizens.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““There is no good reason why effect should not be given to the intention of the parties on the subject. . . . It is clear, then, that this trust was operative during the life of the wife, and that a court of equity will enforce it.” ( 76 U. S. 752, 753 .)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.