Hanover v. Ruch’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]e have not hesitated to abolish obsolete common-law doctrines. Indeed, we have a special duty to do so where it is the Court, rather than the Legislature, which has recognized and nurtured the action. [W]e abdicate our own function, in a field peculiarly non-statutory, when we refuse to consider an old and court-made rule.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Key v. State · Dupuis v. Hand

2. “First, the General Assembly is without authority to enact a retrospective law, affecting vested substantive rights. Tenn. Const, art. I, § 20. 2 Where a statute alters the common law and results in deprivation of a valuable common-law right, such statute cannot constitutionally be applied retroactively. See Massey v. Sullivan County, 225 Tenn. 132 , 464 S.W.2d 548 (1971). ... 3 Determining the status of the common law in effect on the date of filing is within the exclusive jurisdiction of this Court. Thus, the statute itself contemplates that the Supreme Court, not the Legislature, has the power to abolish a common-law tort retrospectively.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dupuis v. Hand

3. “The trial judge was correct, under the then-existing law, in granting the motion for summary judgment. However, we have decided that the rule applied has been orphaned by logic and reason, and direct that the summary judgment be set aside and the matter remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dupuis v. Hand