Ableman v. Holman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““See also, Homan v. Hall, L. R. A. 1918C, 1195, and note ( 102 Neb. 70 , 165 N. W. 881 ). “This is an exception to the general rule. The general rule is stated in Martens v. Reilly, 109 Wis. 464 , 84 N. W. 840 , to the effect that the violation of a contract is an unlawful act, and that a conspiracy or combination to bring about the doing of the unlawful act is a wrong for which the person injured may maintain an action for damages. The reason for the exception is stated in Homan v. Hall, supra: ‘The right of engaged parties to ask advice of their friends and the right of the friends to give advice have never been denied. To hold that a third party may be subject to answer in damages for advising or inducing an engaged person to break the engagement might result in a suit by every disappointed lover against his successful rival. The state has an interest in the marriage relation, and, until the marriage is solemnized, no domestic rights exist, and therefore cannot be violated. ’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Clarahan v. Cosper