182 W. Va. 28 - Pajak v. Pajak’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently September 2007
14 state decisions
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 148 W. Va. 160 - Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Federal Insurance Co. of New York · 164 W. Va. 241 - Masinter v. Webco Co. · 167 W. Va. 59 - Garska v. McCoy · Zimmie v. Zimmie · 172 W. Va. 158 - LaRue v. LaRue
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“although advice of independent counsel at the time parties enter into a prenuptial agreement helps demonstrate that there has been no fraud, duress or misrepresentation, and that the agreement was entered into knowledgeably and voluntarily, such independent advice of counsel is not a prerequisite to enforceability when the terms of the agreement are understandable to a reasonably intelligent adult and both parties have had the opportunity to consult with independent counsel”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“... it is not necessary that before the agreement was executed the parties meticulously disclosed to one another every detail of their financial affairs: it is sufficient if the party against whom the agreement is to be enforced had a general idea of the other party’s financial condition and there was no fraud or concealment that had the effect of inducing the party to be charged into entering an agreement that otherwise would not have been made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“for a prenuptial agreement to be valid, it is not necessary that both parties execute a detailed, written financial statement such as is required by a bank before making a loan”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Friezo v. Friezo
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.