Ames v. Ames’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 20 state decisions

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

1. ““If this were a partition action in which heirs, as such, sought to carve out and have set aside to them portions of a decedent’s estate the district court would not have jurisdiction. (Felton v. Rubow, 163 Kan. 82 , 179 P.2d 935 ; Houdashelt v. Sweet, 163 Kan. 97, 103 , 180 P.2d 604 ). That, however, is not this case. Here the title to the respective interests of plaintiif (appellee), appellant and their mother had vested in each of them prior to the mother’s death. In asking partition in the instant case appellee simply asserted his own, his defendant brother’s and their mother’s interests as they stood prior to her death and sought to have those interests segregated. In this action appellee and appellant in legal contemplation occupy the same position as complete strangers would occupy towards decedent’s estate. That is also true concerning the other defendants against whom it was sought to have the interests of the cotenants quieted. Under these circumstances the partition action was properly brought in the district court. (Stuart v. Hoatson, 163 Kan. 117 , 180 P.2d 609 .)””

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

2. “to make any order . . . necessary to make a just and equitable partition between the parties.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 62 Kan. App. 2d 196 - Claeys v. Claeys