Lea v. . Lea’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 state decisions

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

1. ““It is insisted by the defendant that, as the marriage was void, there were no 'bonds of matrimony’ to dissolve, and, therefore, the plaintiff’s ease is not within the statute. We can not accept this restricted interpretation. The words, from the bonds of matrimony’ a vinculo matrimonii, have a well-known significance at common law, and it must be presumed that it was in this sense that they were used by the legislature. “At common law, no divorce a vinculo could be granted, except for causes existing previous to the marriage, and which ‘rendered the marriage unlawful- ab initio.’ ‘In such cases/ says Blackstohe, vol. 2, 94, ‘the law looks upon the marriage to have been' always null and' void, ... and decrees not only'a separation from bed and board, but a vinculo matrimonii itself.’ Ill view of this high authority the argument of the defendant, founded upon the strict and literal meaning of the words of the statute, must fall to the ground. Pre-contract of marriage is, in common legal parlance, considered as a cause for divorce. For example, we have the able and discriminating Mr. Irving Browne, in his work on ‘Domestic Relations,’ 61, using the following language: ‘The law recognizes three kinds of divorces — first, divorces on the ground of the nullity of the marriage contract . . . For this divorce there are, generally, five 'causes — lack of legal aid, former marriage,’ &c.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Leckney v. Leckney

2. ““ At common law, suits for nullity were freely entertained in the ecclesiastical courts, and, while they were unnecessary in cases like the present, so far as they affected the actual legal relations of the parties, it was deemed 'expedient to procure a sentence to prevent the consequences which might, in future, take place from the death of witnesses, or other occurrences rendering proof of the invalidity of the marriage difficult or impossible. . . . It is a matter of duty which the courts owe to the public to declare the situation of the parties. . . '. It may be necessary, for the convenience and happiness of families, and of the public, likewise, that the real character of these domestic connections should be ascertained and made known.’ Shelford on Marriage and Divorce, 332. Appreciating these reasons, our legislature has provided (The Code, § 1283) 'that the Superior Court, in term-time, on application made as by law provided by either party to a marriage contracted contrary to the prohibition contained in chapter 42 (The Code), or declared void by said chapter, may declare such marriage void from the beginning.’ ''Chapter 42, § 1810 of The Gode, provides that all marriages 'between persons, either of whom has a husband or wife diving at the time of such marriage . . . shall be void.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Leckney v. Leckney

3. ““The defendant further contends that, inasmuch as the plaintiff alleges that the marriage is void, she is estopped. This is but another form of the foregoing objection, and is, therefore, untenable. If, as we have seen, her case is within the statute allowing alimony, it would be strange indeed if she is to be deprived of it by alleging the very fact upon which her cause of action depends. All that the law requires, is the proof or admission of a de facto marriage. This suggestion of estoppel comes with little grace from one who has beguiled the plaintiff into a false marriage, and who, when she is compelled to leave him, by reason of his cruel ‘treatment, as well as the discovery of her forlorn legal status, detains from her what little property she owns.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Leckney v. Leckney