Kain v. . Larkin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

78 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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A fraudulent intent on the part of the grantor and grantee is averred. The evidence necessary to support these allegations of a fraudulent intent may be, and usually is, made up of many different facts and circumstances; but it is not necessary to insert them in a pleading, and it is generally improper to • do so. The pecuniary condition of the defendant at the time, the extent of his property, the part transferred and that retained, as well as the nature and extent of the plaintiff’s claim, which subsequently ripened into a judgment, were all facts bearing on the general allegation of fraud. The plaintiff could: .prove all these facts and circumstances under her complaint. The general allegation that a conveyance or transfer of property was made with the intent 'to hinder, delay, and defraud creditors is broad and sweeping in its operation •and effect. It involves many elements, and may, before it can be deemed •established, require proof of many other facts and circumstances, which may be given in evidence under the general charge, without inserting them in the .pleading.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Citizens' Nat. Bank v. Hodges

2. ““The complaint in this case clearly avers the recovery of a judgment by the plaintiff against one of the defendants, and the return of an execution issued thereon unsatisfied; that the judgment is still due; that after the cause of action accrued the defendant transferred his property which would be subject to the lien of an execution to his wife, daughter, and brother, by instruments particularly described; and that by the death of the wife, and through a satisfaction of the mortgage on the real estate by the brother, and a deed to her by the plaintiff, all this property has become vested in and is now held by the daughter, who has been made a defendant, and has answered the complaint. The complaint then avers that the deed, mortgage, and transfer of money in bank to defendant’s credit to his wife, daughter, and brother were made without consideration, and with the intent to hinder, delay, and defraud the plaintiff of her claim.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Citizens' Nat. Bank v. Hodges