Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 161 KAN 284 - Jones v. Jones

Jones v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
November 1975
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently November 1975

21 state decisions

1001946195019601970decided

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 Bruington v. Wagoner · Riffel v. Dieter · Moore v. Wade · Winston v. Burnell · Wyatt v. Collins

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

  1. ““An agreement that an instrument in form an absolute deed was executed and delivered only as security for the payment of a debt owing by the grantor to the grantee is not within the statute of frauds and such agreement may be proved by parol testimony. “The character of the instrument as a mortgage having been established, upon payment of the debt, the debtor was entitled as a matter of law to have the mortgaged real estate reconveyed to him. “The fact that an instrument in form an absolute deed was in reality only a lhortgage, must be proved by a clear preponderance of the evidence, but that rule is for the guidance of the trial court, and on appeal the appellate court assumes the trial court knew and applied that rule.” (Syl. ¶¶ 1, 2, & 3.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““. . . It is well established that the trial court, not this court, has the duty of determining whether the evidence is clear and convincing, and that on appeal it is of no consequence there was much contradictory evidence offered, which, if believed, would have compelled entirely different findings of fact and an entirely different judgment . . .””
    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.