Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 159 Tex. 280 - Ricks v. Smith

Ricks v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1958

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
August 1970
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1970

11 state decisions

100195819601970decided

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 Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association v. S Parnell Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association · National Metropolitan Bank v. United States · Edds v. Mitchell, Admr. · Womack v. Womack · Volunteer State Life Insurance v. Hardin

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

  1. ““It cannot be questioned that the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals follows the rule adopted by a majority of the courts. A number of cases from other jurisdictions are cited in the annotation in 37 A.L.R.2d 1216 et seq. The annotation is to the Louisiana case of Slater v. Culpepper, 222 La. 962 , 64 So.2d 234 , 37 A.L.R.2d 1216 , which case declined to give controlling effect to the Treasury regulations incorporated in the bonds, holding that to do so would nullify community property law of that State. While that case is the only one cited from a State having community property law, we agree with the Court of Civil Appeals that the purchase of the bonds was by a contract which created a property right, — not merely a method of payment for the convenience of the Treasury Department. There is no sanctity of the community property law above that of other types of law. To give supremacy to Federal regulations no more affects community property law than laws of descent and distribution. The solution as to the property rights of the surviving co-owner of ‘or’ bonds rests in contract, and that contract becomes a part of the bonds. The decisions in this jurisdiction cited in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals, while not deciding the precise question here presented, are certainly in harmony with the majority rule followed by that court. We, therefore, approve that holding.””
    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.