Warburton v. White’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

51 federal appellate · 17 district · 60 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 208 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Where state decisions have intei-preted state- laws governing real property, or controlling relations which are essentially of a domestic and state nature, —in other words, where the state decisions establish a rule of'property — this! court, when called upon to Interpret the state law, will, If It is possible to do so, in the discharge of its duty, adopt and follow the settled rule of construction affixed by the state court of last resort to the statutes of the state, and thus conform to the rule of property within the state. It is undoubted that this rule obtains, even although the decisions of the state court, from which the rule of property arises, may have been for the first time announced subsequent to the period when a particular contract was entered into.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Reed v. Munn · United States v. Victor Robert Nava, Sr., AKA Big Vic, and Victoria Nava

2. “"Property acquired during marriage with community funds becomes an acquet of the community, and not the sole property of the one in whose name the property was bought, although by the law existing at the time the husband was given the management, control, and power of sale of such property, this right- being vested in him, not because he was the exclusive owner, but because by law he was created the agent of the community; the proceeds of the property when sold by him becoming an acquet of the community, subject to the trust which the statute imposed upon the husband, from the very nature of the property relation engendered by the provision for the community.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Poe v. Seaborn · In re the Estate of Williams

3. ““By virtue of the statute this husband and wife creature acquires' property. That property must be procurable, manageable, convertible, and transferable in some way. In somebody must be vested a power in behalf of the community to deal with and dispose of it. To somebody it must go in case of death or divorce. Its exemptions and liabilities as to indebtedness must be defined. All this is regulated by statute. . Management and disposition may be vested in either one or both of the members. If in one, then that one is not thereby made the holder, of larger proprietary rights than the other, but is' clothed, in addition to his or her proprietary rights, with a bare power in trust for the community. This power the statute of 1873 chose to lay upon.the husband, while the statute of 1879 thought proper to take it from the husband and lay it upon husband and wife together. As the husband’s ‘like absolute power of disposition as of his own separate estate,’ bestowed by the ninth section of the act of 1873 [Laws 1873, i>. 452], was a mere power conferred upon him as member apd head of the community, in trust for the community, and not a proprietary right, it was perfectly competent for the Legislature of 1879 to take it from him and assign it to himself and his wife conjointly.””

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