Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 85 N.H. 419 - Heath v. Heath

Heath v. Heath’s Empirical Analysis

1932

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
7
states following
August 2017
most recently cited

33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably Maier Hanson v. Hanson (1934), Manchester v. Manchester Teachers Guild (1957)

33 state decisions

120193219401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Dunlap v. Dunlap · Frank Guy v. John a Donald · Lisbon v. Lyman · Pierce v. State · Nelson v. Brown

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

  1. “so broad and general in its comprehensive scope that it leaves much to the discretion of the trier and practically each case would be largely decided on its own special merits. The uncertainties and discrepancies that would thus arise would produce an unsatisfactory situation both from the public’s and the individual’s standpoint.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Whatever the differences in definition of the kind and nature of fraud required to warrant an annulment, deception by one of the parties as to character, morality, habits, wealth, or social position is generally held insufficient.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[s]tatutes and decisions are admittedly sources of the ascertainment of public policy”
    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.