78 Misc. 2d 13 - Slater v. Slater’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
February 2002
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Hoffman v. United States · Rogers v. United States · Wild v. United States · United States v. Weisman · 11 Ariz. App. 62 - Thoresen v. SUPERIOR COURT, IN AND FOR MARICOPA COUNTY
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In the judicial determination of whether silence is indeed justified, each case must be controlled by its own facts .... “In this, as in all difficult matrimonial disputes, the wife has a right to inquire into the financial status of her husband. While it is quite true that the husband has an absolute Constitutional right to assert the privilege against self-incrimination, his declaration of said assertion does not preclude any further inquiry. The difficulties that arise in these touchy matters are obvious; that is, if further inquiry were permitted to be pursued, the very matter that the Constitution seeks to protect would be divulged. Conversely, if the bald assertion of the privilege were accepted at face value, the substantive rights of the wife in this instance could be severely prejudiced. On balance, it would appear that the interests of justice would best be served if this examination were permitted to continue . . . under the close scrutiny and supervision of this court, toward the full protection of both the substantive rights of the wife and the Constitutional privileges of the husband.” (Slater v. Slater (1974) 78 Misc.2d 13, 15-16 [ 355 N.Y.S.2d 943, 946 ], citation omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.