Masterman v. Masterman’s Empirical Analysis
1916
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 7 district · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably In Re Ford (1980), Morris Lipsitz, and Morris Lipsitz and Helen Lipsitz v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1955)
10 federal appellate · 7 district · 41 state decisions
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 Hiles v. . Fisher · Brewer v. Bowersox · Reed v. Reed · Jordan v. Reynolds · Marburg v. Cole
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is not because a conveyance or gift is made to husband and wife as joint-tenants that the estate by entireties arises, but it is because a conveyance or gift is made to two persons who are husband and wife; and since in the contemplation of the common law they are but one person, they take and can only take, not by moieties, but the entirety. The marital relation with its common law unity of two persons in one, gives rise to this peculiar estate when a conveyance or gift is made to them without restrictive or qualifying words; and they hold as tenants by the entirety, not because they are declared to so hold, but because they are husband and wife. This estate with its incidents continues in Maryland as it existed at the common law. McCubbin v. Stanford, 85 Md. 390 [ 37 A. 214 , 60 Am. St. Rep. 329 ]. It differs materially from all other tenancies. The right •of survivorship, which is one of its chief incidents, cannot be destroyed except by the joint-act of the two; and upon the death of either the other succeeds to the entire property or fund. 2 Bl. Com., 182; Coke, Litt., 187A; Green v. King, 2 W. Bl. 1211; Hanan [Hannan] v. Towers, 3 Har. & J. 147 [ 5 Am. Dec. 427 ].” Brewer v. Bowersox, 92 Md. 567 , 572, 573, 48 A. 1060 , 1062.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.