Ransom v. Ransom’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably 39 Cal. 4th 95 - Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. (2006), Burgeson v. State (1996)
4 federal appellate · 19 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Hollowell v. Jove · Enfinger v. International Indemnity Co. · Wilson v. Board of Regents of the University System
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`A cardinal rule of statutory construction is that courts must look to the purpose and intent of the legislature and construe statutes so as to implement that intent.' Enfinger v. Intl. Indem. Co., 253 Ga. 185 ( 317 SE2d 816 ) (1984); Wilson v. Bd. of Regents, 246 Ga. 649, 650 ( 272 SE2d 496 ) (1980). OCGA § 16-11-62, formerly Code Ann. § 26-2002, was enacted in 1967. Former Code Ann. § 26-2001, Ga. L. 1967, pp. 844, 845, states the purpose of Code Ch. 26-20, relating to the offenses of `peeping tom' and eavesdropping. `It is the public policy of this State and the purpose and intent of this Chapter to protect the citizens of this State from invasions upon their privacy. This Chapter shall be construed in light of this expressed policy and purpose. The employment of devices which would permit the clandestine overhearing, recording or transmitting of conversations or observing of activities which occur in a private place has come to be a threat to an individual's right of privacy and, therefore, should be prohibited. It is further the purpose of this Chapter to provide to authorized law enforcement officers modern methods of crime detection and prevention under strict procedures and safeguards.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a]ny person in a clandestine manner intentionally to ... record ... the private conversation of another which shall originate in any private place.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[n]o evidence obtained in a manner which violates any of the provisions of [the Eavesdropping Statute] shall be admissible in any [Georgia] court[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.