Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 166 W. Va. 304 - Marshall v. Marshall

166 W. Va. 304 - Marshall v. Marshall’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
3
states following
December 2007
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently December 2007

21 state decisions

120198019902000decided

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 Abujasen v. United States · 1 Cal. 3d 467 - Kulchar v. Kulchar · Eubanks v. Eubanks · Peyton v. William C. Peyton Corp. · 162 W. Va. 925 - Kanawha Valley Bank v. Friend

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. “"1. One who receives property from another with whom he has a confidential relationship has the burden of showing that the transfer was fair and made with utmost good faith. "2. The relationship between husband and wife is one of confidence and trust. "3. Where persons occupy a fiduciary or confidential relationship the lack of independent advice on the part of the person who claims to be disadvantaged by the transaction may be a significant factor in a court's evaluation of the overall bona fides of the transaction."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “1. One who receives property from another with whom he has a confidential relationship has the burden of showing that the transfer was fair and made with utmost good faith.”
    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.