29 N.J. Super. 145 - State v. Tracy’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “There are two things to be said as to these federal cases. First, other courts faced with statutes similar to the federal stautes — similar, in that they contain no exception to cover the matter of proper medical use — have rejected the federal authorities refusing to inject into their statutes such an exception. State v. Nelson, 126 Conn. 412 , 11 A. 2 d 856 ( Sup. Ct. Err. 1940); Tileston v. Ullman, 129 Conn. 84 , 26 A. 2 d 582 ( Sup. Ct. Err. 1942); Commonwealth v. Gardner, 300 Mass. 372 , 15 N.E. 2 d 222 ( Sup. Jud. Ct. 1938); cf. Lanteen Laboratories, Inc. v. Clark, 294 Ill. App. 81 , 13 N.E. 2 d 678 ( App. Ct. 1938). Second, the New Jersey statute is not so unreasonable as to warrant the taking of liberties with its language. Indeed, it is quite different from the statute first enacted in New Jersey, L. 1869, p. 1115, which was unqualified in its terms, and which in that respect was like the Comstock Act of 1873, now 18 U.S.C. § 1461 , supra, and like other similar statutes enacted then and thereafter in a nation-wide movement ( cf. Lanteen Laboratories, Inc. v. Clark, 294 Ill. App. 81 , 13 N.E. 2 d 678 ( App. Ct. 1938)). However, the Revision of 1877, p. 234, § 44, introduced into our statute the words `without just cause,' a phrase not found in the federal acts; and these words make provision for the very situations that concern the federal courts, the cases of `proper medical care' and the like. * * *”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 72 N.J. Super. 276 - Sanitary Vendors, Inc. v. Byrne

2. “* * * with respect to the statutory provision as to just cause no question was raised below and the briefs here do not go into it.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 42 N.J. Super. 578 - State v. Kohn

3. “designed or purporting to be designed for the prevention of conception”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 72 N.J. Super. 276 - Sanitary Vendors, Inc. v. Byrne