Hill v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis
1943
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 78 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably 39 Cal. 2d 858 - De Burgh v. De Burgh (1952), 49 Cal. 2d 210 - Spellens v. Spellens (1957)
3 federal appellate · 78 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 Pereira v. Pereira · Pryor v. Pryor · 20 Cal. 2d 640 - Moss v. Moss · Deyoe v. Superior Court · Sears Ettlinger v. Ettlinger
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Agreements not to defend or to abandon a defense in a divorce action, to destroy or conceal evidence in proceedings for divorce, and to procure or furnish testimony of certain facts which will successfully support or defeat a divorce action, or which provide that payment to the party procuring evidence to be used in such an action is contingent upon the result of the action have been held void as parts of collusive arrangements to facilitate divorce.” (Citing many cases, including Beard v. Beard, supra.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Public policy seeks to foster and protect marriage to encourage parties to live together, and to prevent separation (citations). But public policy does not discourage divorce where the relations between husband and wife are such that the legitimate objects of matrimony have been utterly destroyed, (citations). In the absence of fraud, collusion or imposition upon the court, public policy does not prevent parties who have separated from entering into a contract disposing of their property rights which shall become effective only in the event one of the parties obtains a divorce, * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Miller v. Miller
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.