Vanderbilt v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
1907
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 6 district · 70 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently January 2007 · most notably 173 W. Va. 699 - Crump v. Beckley Newspapers, Inc. (1984), 138 Cal. App. 2d 82 - Fairfield v. American Photocopy Equipment Co. (1955)
5 federal appellate · 6 district · 70 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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 Roberson v. . Rochester Folding Box Co. · Pavesich v. New England Life Insurance · Jones v. Porter
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In this state, in the leading case of Carris v. Carris, 24 N. J. Eq. (9 C. E. Gr.) 516, the court of chancery is declared to have inherent jurisdiction to annul the status of marriage on the ground of fraud, entirely independent of the statute of New Jersey which regulates the subject of marriage and divorce. The same principle was followed by Chancellor Zabriskie in McClurg v. Terry, 21 N. J. Eq. 225; by Vice-Chancellor Pitney in Rooney v. Rooney, 54 N. J. Eq. (9 Dick. Ch. Rep.) 231, and by the present chancellor [the late Chancellor Magie] in Crane v. Crane, 62 N. J. Eq. (17 Dick. Ch. Rep.) 21. “In these cases jurisdiction was assumed upon the ground that marriage is a civil contract and that courts of equity have always entertained suits to set aside contracts on the ground of fraud. “We have referred to the doctrine of the Oarris Case, and have cited with approval the McGlurg, Rooney and Crane Gases, as illustrating the view which our courts take of the doctrine of equitable jurisdiction as contradistinguished from the narrower English-rule. “The rule of the Carris Case has been generally followed in this country, but in England it has been discussed and squarely rejected. Moss v. Moss, L. R. Prob. (1897), 263.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * the jurisdiction of equity is constantly growing and expanding, and relief is now granted in cases where formerly the courts would not have thought for a moment of so doing. From time immemorial it has been the rule not to grant equitable relief where a party praying for it had an adequate remedy at law, but modern ideas of what are adequate remedies are changing and expanding, and it is gradually coming to be understood that a system of law which will not prevent the doing of a wrong, but only affords redress after the wrong is committed, is not a complete system, and is inadequate to the present needs of society.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a case seldom cited but to be disapproved.”
2 later decisions 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.