In re Freitas’s Empirical Analysis
1936
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently August 1978
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 Taubel-Scott-Kitzmiller Co. v. Fox · Taubel-Scott-Kitzmiller Co. v. Fox · Murphy v. John Hofman Co. · Whitney v. Wenman · Schumacher v. Beeler
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The question next arises: From what is this beneficiary barred? He is not called upon to forfeit any property already vested in him. The equitable maxim is a hand which raises a bar to recovering profit. It is not a scoop to lift from him what he has already properly acquired. “Penal Code of California, Sec. 2604: “ ‘(Forfeiture of property on conviction.) No conviction of any person for a crime works any forfeiture of any property, except in cases in which a forfeiture is expressly imposed by law; * * *Added by Stats.1941, ch. 106, § 15. “The definition of community property is drawn from certain sections of the Civil Code of California which read as follows: “ ‘§ 162. Separate property of the wife. All property of the wife, owned by her before marriage, and that acquired afterwards by gift, bequest, devise, or descent, with the rents, issues, and profits thereof, is her separate property. The wife may, without the consent of her husband, convey her separate property. (Enacted 1872.)’ “ ‘§ 163. Separate property of the husband. All property owned by the husband before marriage, and that acquired afterwards by gift, bequest, devise, or descent, with the rents, issues, and profits thereof, is his separate property. (Enacted 1872.)’ “ ‘§ 161a. (Interests in community property.) The respective interests of the husband and wife in community property during continuance of the marriage relation are present, existing and equal interests under the management and control of the husba”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““* * * As to money deposited in a bank by husband or wife, after marriage, the presumption is that it is community property. (Citing cases) A like presumption applies to all personal property acquired after marriage, no matter in whose name the title stands. * * *” (Emphasis theirs.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * As to money deposited in a bank by husband or wife, after marriage, the presumption is that it is community property. (Citing cases.) A like presumption applies to all personal property acquired after marriage, no matter in whose name the title stands. * * (Emphasis theirs.)”
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.