Ryan v. Ryan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 4 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The test of admissibility of the statements is their spontaneity and we cannot find error, unless the court abused its discretion in ruling on the admissibility. Peterson v. Cochran & McCluer Co., 308 Ill. App. 348 . Ryan had the burden of showing the statements were spontaneous. Johnson v. Swords Co., 286 Ill. App. 377 . While courts recognize the need of applying the res gestae rule to divorce and separate maintenance cases because the nature of the marriage relation renders witnesses to actual misconduct improbable; nevertheless, the element of spontaneity is required (Bishop on Marriage, vol. 2, sec. 1448), and should be in actions attacking that sanctified and necessary relationship. Neither Passmore v. Passmore, 113 Ind. 237 , 15 N. E. 338 nor Berdell v. Berdell, 80 Ill. 604 , relied upon here announce a different rule; and Muir v. Muir, 310 Ill. App. 443 , should not be understood as holding that practice in divorce cases has changed the rule.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bogaerts v. Bogaerts

2. ““The court saw the several witnesses, and the decision was one which depended upon the weight given the testimony. We cannot substitute our judgment for its and say that plaintiff was not telling the truth and that the trial court should have believed the defendant.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bogaerts v. Bogaerts