Mitchell v. Hardwick’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In Wilson v. Jones, 281 S.C. 230 , 314 S.E.2d 341 (1984), this court held that. .. Trimble would be given prospective effect only and that only those illegitimate children whose fathers died after April 26, 1977, the date of the Trimble decision, may inherit from their father’s estate. We reasoned that “retroactive application of Trimble would disrupt the orderly process of probate.” 314 S.E.2d at 343 .... The dispositive issue is whether the prospective only application enunciated in Wilson should be modified to allow limited retroactive application where certain factors are met.... Relying upon Williamson v. Gane, 176 W. Va. 443 (1986), and Marshall v. Marshall, 670 S.W.2d 213 (Tenn. 1984), both courts having earlier reached the same result with the same limitations upon retrospective application of Trimble , the South Carolina Supreme Court concluded: We now hold that the Wilson opinion is hereby modified to allow retroactive application of the Trimble decision in the limited circumstances where the following conditions are met: (1) innocent persons will not be adversely affected because of their detrimental reliance on the old rule; (2) the paternity of the child has been conclusively established either by court order or decree issued prior to the death of the father or by an instrument signed by the father acknowledging paternity; and (3) the state administration is subject to further resolution.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hart v. Posey

2. “the estate has never been formally probated and, therefore, the disruption of the probate process would not occur in this situation”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ka'u Agribusiness Co. v. Heirs of Ahulau

3. “estate administration is subject to further resolution”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Pitzer v. Union Bank of Cal.