171 W. Va. 170 - Simmons v. Simmons’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘Code, 48-2-15, confers on a court in a divorce suit power to make any order or decree concerning the estate of the parties, or either of them, as it may deem expedient, only for the purpose of making effectual any order or decree made in the case relating to the maintenance of the parties, or the custody and maintenance of their children.’ Syllabus point 1, McKinney v. Kingdon, 162 W.Va. 319 , 251 S.E.2d 216 (1978).” Syl. pt. 1, Simmons v. Simmons, 171 W.Va. 170 , 298 S.E.2d 144 (1982).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Abraham v. Abraham · Travis v. Travis

2. ““Prior to the death of a donor depositor, a rebuttable presumption exists under the provisions of Code, 1931, 31A-4-33, as amended, that the ownership of the funds is joint, a presumption which may be overcome by competent evidence.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 175 W. Va. 512 - Conner v. Conner · 173 W. Va. 69 - Dodd v. Hinton

3. “[T]his factor is not dispositive of the issue. Under the provisions of W.Va.Code § 31A-4-33 and our holding in Dorsey v. Short, supra , once funds are deposited in a joint banking account, they are presumed to be jointly owned. The source of the funds is irrelevant.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 183 W. Va. 451 - Whiting v. Whiting