Hazard v. Durant’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ The defendant entreats for leave to answer, denying them [the averments of the bill], . ... Shall we then proceed as if they were true, because the defendant, .being in contempt, and unable to relieve himself, cannot make his denial effectual by answer or defence? The question is novel; but we think it admits of but one solution. The court must be careful not to become an instrument of injustice, even against a person who has forfeited all claims upon its favor. We decide, therefore, that the cause must go to a master to inquire into the truth of the inculpating allegations of the bill, and if he finds them true to any extent, to take the account accordingly, making, for the sake of dispatch, one report of the entire matter. We also decide that in making the inquiry, the master shall not be confined to testimony furnished by the complainants,, but shall notify Durant, so that he may be present, if he sees fit, to aid the inquiry, and to testify himself, and furnish the testimony of others.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hovey v. Elliott