Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 109 OR 430 - Stout v. Van Zante

Stout v. Van Zante’s Empirical Analysis

1923

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
3
states following
July 1984
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently July 1984 · most notably Ganoe v. Ohmart (1927), In Re Edwards' Estate (1932)

6 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

1701923193019401950196019701980decided

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 Bertles v. . Nunan · Overheiser v. . Lackey · In Re the Final Accounting of Executors of Albrecht · In Re the Transfer Tax Upon the Estate of Klatzl · Mills v. . Husson

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

  1. ““The evidence entirely fails to disclose that there was any agreement between the husband and wife that upon his death the plaintiff should become the owner of his interest in the note, * *”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Hence, under the rules of the common law, the respondent and her husband would not have become joint tenants of notes acquired by them jointly during coverture. Nor do we agree with the contention now made that while joint tenancy, in its application to real property, is now abolished by statute in its application to personal property it is not.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““* * * This contention implies that at common law a husband and wife, upon the acquisition by them jointly of property during coverture, not only held the property by the entirety but also as joint tenants. This supposition, however, is erroneous.” (Citing cases).”
    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.