Hill v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 54 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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Reading from the body of the opinion which you have just quoted, Mr. Bell, for the Court, it states: “ ‘Where one party advances money to another upon the faith of an agreement by the latter to secure its payment by a mortgage upon certain lands, . . .’ and in this case, the Court cannot find that there was any agreement to that effect; in fact, it is just to the contrary. The evidence discloses that they were perfectly content to look to the signature of Dr. Acker’s father for their security rather than to the property in question. There was some dis cussion between the parties regarding execution of a mortgage, if, and based upon, the contingency that it could not be procured at lower rates at a later date in the Wichita area; but the testimony even then discloses that the Bank was in fact reluctant to accept a mortgage on property that was more than fifty miles outside of the area. “I think the key word in the Hill case is that of intent. Reading from the Syllabus that, ‘If the intent appears to give or charge real property as a security for an obligation, the lien follows.’ And considering the plaintiff’s evidence in its best light, I don’t think there was ever that intent to look to the property for the security. I think they were looking entirely to Dr. Acker. “I am going to sustain the motion to dismiss.’’”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dworkin v. First National Bank of Fairbanks · Union National Bank & Trust Co. v. Acker

2. ““An equitable lien is not a right of property in the subject matter of the hen nor a right of action therefor, nor does it depend upon possession; but is merely a right to have the property subjected to the payment of a debt or claim, and it applies as well to charges arising by express engagement of the owner of property as to a duty or intention implied on his part to make the property answerable for a specific debt or engagement.” (Syl. 5.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ford v. Guarantee Abstract & Title Co.

3. ““But where the mortgage is foreclosed without presentation and allowance against the estate of the deceased mortgagor, the collection of the debt will be limited to the proceeds arising from the sale of the mortgaged property, where no claim is presented as required by the statute.” Quoting 1 Wiltsie on Mortgage Foreclosure § 157, p. 276 (5th ed. rev. 1939).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ram Company, Inc. v. Estate of Kobbeman