Smith v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 37 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The minority rulings brush aside the risk of collusion by the husband and wife by the simple assertion that the courts know how to deal with collusive suits. But it is obvious that the risk of collusive action increases when the parties plaintiff and defendant are in confidential relationship. The risk of financial loss is ordinarily inducement enough to encourage a sturdy defense. Remove from a defendant the risk of loss and substitute the covert hope of profit and a situation arises which should give us pause. ... We revere the jury system as the bulwark of individual liberty, but we are also realists, and we know that juries are, as a Kentucky mountaineer once said--'tolerable generous with other people's money,' especially when the aroma of insurance permeates the courtroom. It would seem that if husband and wife want protection by insurance, accident policies are available. We do see a substantial risk of miscarriage of justice when, in the peace and harmony of conjugal bliss, a wife prepares a damage suit against her husband over the solitary protest of an insurance company.”

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

2. ““***[W]hen the public policy of the state is clearly expressed by statute, it will control, and that in general, questions of public policy are primarily, though not exclusively, for legislative determination.” Smith v. Smith, supra, at 299 , 287 P. 2d at 578 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 61 Ohio App. 2d 67 - Kobe v. Kobe

3. ““They [the statutes relating to the rights' of married women] did eliminate the ancient theory that husband and wife are one and the husband is that one, and they did create separate property rights in married women.” [2S7 P.2d at 577.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Carver v. Gilbert