Jaeckel v. Jaeckel’s Empirical Analysis
1943
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently December 1969
7 state decisions
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 Goldman v. Goldman · Schmelzel v. Schmelzel · Fales v. Fales · Chester v. Chester · Bell v. Bell
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Bell v. Bell, 171 Misc. 605 , 13 N.Y.S.2d 500 , an action on the contract fixing the amount of permanent alimony was upheld because the contract explicitly provided that `this agreement shall still remain in full force and effect unless mutually modified or cancelled by the parties hereto, and this agreement may be incorporated in any decree of divorce or separation made by any court of competent jurisdiction.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Howland v. Stitzer“So far as the defense of merger is concerned, where there is an intention to merge the agreement as to alimony in the decree and the decree embodies the agreement as to alimony, no right to enforce the alimony provisions of the agreement survives the decree. Chester v. Chester, 171 Misc. 608 , 13 N.Y.S.2d 502 ; Zatz v. Zatz, App.T.First Dept., 173 Misc. 229 , 17 N.Y.S.2d 553 * * *.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Howland v. Stitzer“no reservation that the contract should endure after it became part of the judgment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Howland v. Stitzer
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.