Thomas v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. ““Whether or not the defendant Lawrence should be aligned as a plaintiff or retained in the case as a defendant must be determined by the controlling issues in this case. Indianapolis v. Chase Nat. Bank, 314 U.S. 63 , 62 S.Ct. 15 , 86 L.Ed. 47 . If, for instance, all of the defendants were to admit in their answers that the purported deed from the wife to the husband was a forgery or a nullity, the only real issue or controversy would be in relation to the partition wherein the interest of all would be adversary and no realignment would bo appropriate. But if and when an issue is made on the allegations of invalidity of the deed, or on the title vel non of plaintiff and Lawrence, a realignment of Lawrence as a plaintiff would then be appropriate. Until there is such an issue, either of law or fact, the order of realignment in this case would be premature. No one has taken issue on plaintiff’s allegations as to the invalidity of the deed or the lack of title in her.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dryden v. Dryden

2. “the realignment cannot take place until it has been made to appear that there is no substantial controversy between the plaintiff and the defendant proposed for realignment or that their rights are so identical as to necessitate their being placed on the same side.” Id. at 334 . But this was really an issue of timing. The court said”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 118 F. Supp. 3d 1302 - James River Insurance v. Arlington Pebble Creek, LLC