Mills v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 federal appellate · 137 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 162 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “There are numerous cases to the effect that where at the time of the transfer the transferee was in a confidential relation to the transferor, and the transferor relied upon his oral promise to reconvey the land, he is chargeable as constructive trustee of the land for the transferor. In these cases it is held that the constructive trust will be imposed even though at the time when he acquired the property the transferee intended to perform his promise and was not therefore guilty of fraud in acquiring it; and even though the transferee did not take improper advantage of the confidential relation in procuring the transfer and was not therefore guilty of using undue influence. The abuse of the confidential relation in these cases consists merely in his failure to perform his promise.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Locke v. Thigpen · Stout v. Clayton

2. “"`A constructive trust arises where a conveyance is induced on the agreement of a fiduciary or confidant to hold in trust for a reconveyance or other purpose, where the fiduciary or confidential relationship is one upon which the grantor justifiably can and does rely and where the agreement is breached, since the breach of the agreement is an abuse of the confidence, and it is not necessary to establish such a trust to show fraud or intent not to perform the agreement when it was made. The tendency of the courts is to construe the term "confidence" or "confidential relationship" liberally in favor of the confider and against the confidant, for the purpose of raising a constructive trust on a violation or betrayal thereof.''”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Grunwald v. Grunwald · Locke v. Thigpen

3. ““Clear and concise statements of the distinction between express trusts, constructive trusts, and resultant trusts, and the law with reference thereto, may be found under the topic of ‘Trusts’ in American Jurisprudence. “In 54 Am.Jur. 22, Sec. 5, is the following announcement: “ ‘ * * * From the viewpoint of creative force bringing them into existence, trusts may be classed as “express trusts” and “trusts by operation of law,” the latter being either resulting trusts or constructive trusts. An express trust can come into existence only by the one having legal and equitable dominion over the property made subject to it. A trust by operation of law, frequently called an “implied trust,” comes into existence either through an implication of intention to create a trust as a matter of law or through the imposition of the trust irrespective of, and even contrary to any, such intention. In other words, a trust intentional in fact is an express trust; one intentional in law is a resulting trust; and one imposed irrespective of intention is a constructive trust.’ “The distinction between resultant and constructive trusts is admittedly confusing, but as accurate a statement as may be found is that of the same text, in 54 Am.Jur. 147, Sec. 188, as follows: “ ‘Resulting and constructive trusts are distinguishable, but there is some confusion between them. From a practical viewpoint, a resulting trust involves primarily the operation of the equitable doctrine of consideration — ■ the doct”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Wilson v. Therrell · Johnston v. Mabrey