In Re Blodgett’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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. “[Property] selected by a resident owner and occupied by him shall be exempt from execution ... to the amount of $25,000.... Such exemption extends to land owned by husband and wife jointly or in common....”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Lumb · Matter of Howe

2. “There is nothing in the wording of the statute that places any kind of family limitation upon it [the $5,000 homestead exemption] nor is there anything in the statute to suggest that the exemption is to be divided in the case of joint ownership. The Wisconsin court has in fact, held that the benefits of the law are not restricted to married men in that a single man who owns real estate and resides upon it is entitled to homestead rights. 155 F.Supp. at 38.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Lumb

3. “In the case of West v. Ward, 1870, 26 Wis. 579 , the court held that to constitute a homestead the land must be owned in severalty, that an undivided interest in land could not constitute a homestead. It was to remedy this defect that the statute [Wis.Stat. § 272.20] was amended so as to include the reference to property owned by husband and wife, jointly or in common. 115 F.Supp. at 36 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Matter of Howe