135 N.C. App. 369 - Franzen v. Franzen’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Alexander v. Buckeye Pipe Line Co. · Tanglewood Land Co., Inc. v. Byrd · 126 Ohio App. 3d 109 - Packer, Thomas & Co. v. Eyster · 94 N.C. App. 187 - Morrow v. Morrow · Morrow v. Morrow
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Defendant’s claimed ambiguity is that the provision in Section Five that any property titled jointly is to be considered marital property clashes with the statement in Section Four that all separate assets are to remain separate, even if those assets change form. His argument, however, overlooks the language in Section Four that separate assets remain separate property unless otherwise provided in this Agreement. This caveat eliminates any ambiguity. Separate assets do remain separate property, even if they change form, but only if they do not become marital property.”
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.