Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 171 Md. 405 - Schilbach v. Schilbach

Schilbach v. Schilbach’s Empirical Analysis

1937

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
5
states following
October 2005
most recently cited

46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently October 2005 · most notably Bruce v. Dyer (1987), Crawford v. Crawford (1982)

46 state decisions

16019371940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Hogan v. McMahon · Israel v. Israel · Appeal of Wistar · Schuster v. Schuster · Preston v. Wright

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

  1. “The bill in this case is filed by two persons who, so far as this title is concerned, have no relation to each other. If they, or either of them, have paid a lien or incumbrance... at the request of either of the cotenants, there is no reason why such person should not have the right to assert the same against the property benefited. ... If the third party is a volunteer, he would not have recourse against the property for reimbursement.... Recourse can only be had against the property for such claims as the wife might make if living, and then for payments made on account of liens, incumbrances, and permanent improvements at her request, the assumption being made on the allegations of the bill that nothing was done with the assent of the defendant. Inasmuch as it appears one or the other of the plaintiffs may have come within the rules here stated, the order of the chancellor will be affirmed without prejudice to the rights of the plaintiffs to severally seek the enforcement of the claims which they or either of them may have against the property which the defendant holds as survivor of the entirety, [emphasis supplied]. Id., at 408-409 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““A tenancy by the entireties is essentially a joint tenancy, modified by the common law theory that the husband and wife are one person. 1 Tiffany on Real Property, 645. Except for the fact that it cannot be defeated, during their lives, without the joint action of both, the same rules of law apply to it as to any other cotenancy.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““When one coparcener pays obligations such as taxes, insurance and ordinary repairs, which may be regarded as carrying charges, he does not have recourse against the other for contribution without an agreement from the other to pay. * * (Emphasis supplied) 171 Md. at 408 .”
    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.