Demarigny v. Demarigny’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 44 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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Being neither parties to the action, nor entitled to manage the cause, nor appeal from the judgment, they are by law allowed to impeach it whenever it is attempted to be enforced against them so as to affect rights or interests acquired prior to its rendition. "”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Johnson v. Muelberger · In re Estate of Dee Hanson

2. “"The only tenable exception to the rule that a declaratory judgment proceeding is not an appropriate method of questioning a final judgment or decree (valid on the face of the record) is in case the judgment or decree has become the source of definite rights and is unclear or ambiguous. See Borchard on Declaratory Judgments, Second Edition, page 356. The principal objective of the legislature in adopting the act providing for declaratory judgments or decrees was to establish a means whereby one might obtain a judicial declaration of rights never before determined but in no sense was it the legislative purpose to enable such person to secure a determination as to whether rights previously adjudicated had been properly resolved. * * * "Our view appears to be supported by the weight of authority throughout the country as well as by American Jurisprudence, Vol. 16, pages 295, 296, Section 23, which we quote with approval: `The act is not intended to elucidate or interpret judicial decrees or judgments already entered, or to modify or declare rights thereunder.' * * * "We have disposed of her first contention by holding that our declaratory decree statute does not, in any event, contemplate a declaration of one's status or rights, under an unambiguous decree of a court of competent jurisdiction which was acquired or were developed subsequent thereto." (Emphasis supplied.)”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Thomas v. Thomas · 120 So. 2d 797 - Colby v. Colby

3. ““The bill of complaint constitutes a collateral attack upon a final decree of divorce which was rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction and which appears, upon the record of the proceedings in the cause in which it was entered, to be valid in every respect. “Under such circumstances a final decree is at most voidable only. Ponder v. Mosley, 2 Fla. 207 , 48 Am. Dec. 194 ; Bryant v. Bryant, 101 Fla. 179 , 133 So. 635 . It is necessary in this ease in order for the appellant-petitioner to show the invalidity of the final decree of divorce for her to bring before the Court matters which are dehors the record. We have held many times that this may not be done by collateral attack. [Numerous cases cited]” (Italics added).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Estate of Dee Hanson