158 W. Va. 872 - Tomkies v. Tomkies’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 2002
12 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 158 W. Va. 314 - Parker v. Knowlton Construction Company, Inc. · 149 W. Va. 622 - Bluefield Supply Co. v. Frankel's Appliances, Inc. · Pierce v. Boston Five Cents Savings Bank · 156 W. Va. 351 - Commonwealth Tire Co. v. Tri-State Tire Co. · Norris v. Barbour
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““2. Where a valid inter vivos gift is intended, the donor must be divested of, and the donee invested with the right of property in the subject of the gift. Accordingly, the act of donation must be absolute, irrevocable, and immediate, without any reference to its taking effect at some future period and the donor must deliver the property and part with all present and future dominion over it. “3. The elements of proof required to sustain an inter vivos gift of corporate stock are the same as those required to prove a valid inter vivos gift of other personalty. “4. The mere possession of the subject of an alleged gift, unaccompanied by proof of its delivery by the donor to the donee, is insufficient to establish it as a valid inter vivos gift. “5. The standard of evidence required to establish an inter vivos gift must be clear and convincing on every element necessary to constitute the gift. “6. To sustain a parol gift, it must be shown by clear and convincing proof that the donor made delivery and relinquished all dominion and control over the thing delivered, and that the donee accepted the gift.””
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.