Grobart v. Grobart’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently September 2010 · most notably Lane v. Holderman (1957), 43 N.J. Super. 244 - Di Cristofaro v. Laurel Grove Memorial Park (1957)
44 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
Relies on Blackman v. Iles · Grobart v. Society for Establishing Useful Manufactures · Pine v. Okzewski · Dey v. Dey
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“alters or amends the previous law or creates or abolishes types of actions, it is important, in discovering the legislative intent, to ascertain the old law, the mischief and the proposed remedy.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is not the destruction of affection per se but loss of conjugal society with its mutual rights and obligations directly referable thereto”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In ascertaining the scope of actions the abolishment of which the `Heart Balm Act' was intended to accomplish, we are aided in our inquiry by the broad principles said to underlie the enactment as expressed in the preamble thereto. A preamble may be resorted to for assistance in arriving at the true intention of the lawmakers where doubt arises as to the construction of the statute. [Citing Blackman v. Iles, 4 N.J. 82 (1950).] It is evident from a reading of the preamble thereto that the purpose of the aforesaid statute is to abolish certain causes of action, i.e., alienation of affections, criminal conversation, seduction and breach of contract to marry, arising out of and dependent upon the marital relation, which causes of action, as stated in the preamble, have subjected our people to `extreme annoyance, embarrassment, humiliation and pecuniary damage.' Experience has shown that these actions have been abused by unscrupulous persons and have served as vexatious vehicles in the perpetration of fraud. This is the evil the legislature intended to remedy by the enactment of the `Heart Balm' statute.”
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.