Gee v. Gee’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is held that though the provoking cause for the separation need not be such as would entitle the injured party to a divorce (Spafford v. Spafford, 199 Ala. 300 , 74 So. 354 , L.R.A.1917D, 773) yet the the reasons must be impelling — ‘reasons which involve the fundamental happiness or self-respect of the withdrawing spouse, and the vicious and unjustifiable conduct of the other. And the provoking misconduct should not be occasional or transient only, but continuous or persistent, and apparently irremediable. Bryan v. Bryan, 34 Ala. 516, 519-522 ; Anonymous, 55 Ala. 428 ; Brown v. Brown, 178 Ala. 121 , 59 So. 48 ; Spafford v. Spafford, 199 Ala. 300 , 74 So. 358 , L.R.A.1917D, 773.’ Anonymous, 206 Ala. 295, 297 , 89 So. 462, 463 .””

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

2. ““ * * * The rule is that when the complaining party consents to the separation without it having been caused by the other’s misconduct, the plaintiff cannot procure a divorce for abandonment, but where the agreement to separate was induced by the misconduct of the defendant the plaintiff, notwithstanding a later separation by consent, could still maintain the action and sustain the cause. Ex parte Cox, 230 Ala. 158 , 160 So. 230 ; Higgins v. Higgins, 222 Ala. 44 , 130 So. 677 ; Anonymous, 206 Ala. 295 , 89 So. 462 .””

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