Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 125 MASS 374 - Milliken v. Pratt

Milliken v. Pratt’s Empirical Analysis

1878

Citation profile

105
cited by 105 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
26
states following
June 1995
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 5 district · 78 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 105 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1995 · most notably Allgeyer v. State of Louisiana (1897), American Banana Company v. United Fruit Company (1909)

10 federal appellate · 5 district · 78 state decisions — followed in 26 states

2801878188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Scudder v. Union National Bank · Greenwood v. Curtis · Commonwealth v. Lane · Kline v. Baker · Thompson v. Ketcham

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

  1. ““As the law of another state cannot operate nor be executed in this state by its own force, but only by the comity of this state, its approbation and enforcement here may be restricted by positive prohibition of statute. A stale may always by express enactment protect itself from being obliged to enforce in its courts contracts made abroad by its citizens which are not authorized by its own laws. * * * It is possible, also, that in a state where the common law prevails in full force, by which a married woman was deemed incapable of binding herself by any coniract whatever, it may be inferred that such an utter incapability, lasting throughout the joint lives of husband and wife, must be construed as so fixed by the seitled policy of the state, for the protection of its own citizens, that, it could not be held by the courts of that/ state to yield to the laws of another state in which she might undertake to contract.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The question, therefore, is whether a contract made in another state, which a married woman was not at the lime capable of making under the law of this commonwealth, but was then allowed by the law of that state to make, and which she could now legally make in this commonwealth, will sustain a case against her in our courts.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““If the contract is completed in any staio, it makes no difference, in principle, whether the citizen of this state goes in person or sends an agent, or writes a letter across the boundary line between the two states.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.