The American invention of child support: dependency and punishment in early American child support law.

This document cites

• Georgia - 45 S.E. 399 (Ga. 1903), Baldwin v. State
• Georgia - 48 S.E. 938 (Ga. 1904), Williams v. State
• Iowa - 101 N.W. 275 (Iowa 1904), Ostheimer v. Ostheimer
• Indiana - 5 N.E. 906 (Ind. 1886), 12,978, State v. Rice
• Indiana - 62 N.E. 627 (Ind. 1902), 19,673, Leibold v. Leibold



See all quotations

• Kentucky - 2 S.W. 554 (Ky.App. 1887), Finley v. Finley
• Maine - 9 A. 623 (Me. 1887), Gilley v. Gilley
• Michigan - 40 Mich. 633 (Mich. 1879), Courtright v. Courtright
• Missouri - 67 S.W. 669 (Mo.App. 1902), McCloskey v. McCloskey
• New Jersey - 42 A. 160 (N.J.Super.Ch. 1899), Parker v. Parker
• New Jersey - 50 A. 686 (N.J.Super.Ch. 1901), Abele v. Abele
• Ohio - 15 N.E. 471 (Ohio 1887), Pretzinger v. Pretzinger
• Ohio - 39 N.E. 729 (Ohio 1895), Fulton v. Fulton
• Ohio - 46 N.E. 708 (Ohio 1897), Bowen v. State
• Rhode Island - 55 A. 323 (R.I. 1903), State v. Peabody
• New York - 15 N.Y.S. 328, Flynn v. Central Railroad of New Jersey
• Pennsylvania - 71 Pa. 413 (Pa. 1872), Keller v. Commonwealth
• Wyoming - 33 P. 23 (Wyo. 1893), Nugent v. Powell
• Washington - 51 P. 1041 (Wash. 1898), Gibson v. Gibson
• Delaware - 52 A. 262 (Del. 1902), State v. Miller
• Connecticut - 18 A. 787 (Conn. 1889), State v. Schweitzer