Blakeley v. Kanaman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

36 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““This statute empowers her to convey such property when joined by her husband and her acknowledgment is privily taken, but it recognizes no obligation resting upon her in virtue of a mere contract to convey. Unless it can be properly held that the power to convey imports the authority to contract to convey, this contract was not enforceable against Mrs. Kanaman. This, in our opinion, is a matter of legislation, and not of judicial construction; for neither this statute nor any other in force at the time with which we are dealing in any wise purported to invest a married woman with authority to contract to convey her separate real estate, or to make such a contract binding upon her. Such has been the uniform rule of decision in this court.” (Emphasis added)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Click v. Seale

2. ““The power to convey does not, therefore, enable her to contract generally with reference to her separate property, but only to dispose, in whole or in part of her title; and the only operation which her conveyances have is to pass such title or some interest in it. Wadkins v. Watson, 86 Texas 194 , 24 S. W. 385 , 22 L. R. A. 779.” (Emphasis by Court.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pickens v. Bacle