Powers v. Powers

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• it is manifestly in the public interest that the law remain permanently settled, especially in the construction of statutes, “for if any change in the statutory law is desired, the General Assembly may readily accomplish it”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Conway v. Town of Wilton
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1996-08-06· cited 154×
• Young v. Warr
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1969-01-22· cited 80×
• Dickert v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1993-04-07· cited 43×
• Sallie Zeigler v. Eastman Chemical Company
  Fourth Circuit· 2022-11-23· cited 13×
• Daniels v. Roumillat
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1975-06-04· cited 10×
• Merritt Ex Rel. Estate of Merritt v. Smith
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1977-08-30· cited 9×
• Dickert v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 1991-10-07· cited 8×
• Wehle v. SOUTH CAROLINA RETIREMENT SYSTEM
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2005-03-21· cited 8×
• Layton v. Flowers
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1964-01-13· cited 6×
• Smith v. Daniel Construction Co.
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1969-09-26· cited 4×
• Fernander v. Thigpen
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1979-03-29· cited 3×
• Scarborough v. Hodge
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1972-03-29
• Kevin Vann v. Eastman Chemical Company
  Fourth Circuit· 2022-11-23
• Jacob Jackson v. Eastman Chemical Company
  Fourth Circuit· 2022-11-23

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

• Nolan v. Daley
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1952-11-12· cited 35×