186 W. Va. 635 - Summers v. Summers’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In cases where the parties to an action commenced under the provisions of this article have executed a separation agreement, then the court shall divide the marital property in accordance with the terms of the agreement, unless the court finds: (1)That the agreement was obtained by fraud, duress, or other unconscionable conduct by one of the parties, or (2) That the parties, in the separation agreement, have not expressed themselves in terms which, if incorporated into a judicial order, would be enforceable by a court in future proceedings, or (3) That the agreement, viewed in the context of the actual contributions of the respective parties to the net value of the marital property of the parties, is so inequitable as to defeat the purposes of this section, and such agreement was inequitable at the time the same was executed. In enunciating standards for the evaluation”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Squirts v. Squirts

2. “If the agreement is the product of eleventh hour negotiations or is agreed to on the eve of hearing, it may not bear the deliberateness and informed consent of a prior written agreement. The first time the court will hear the agreement is when it is dictated into the record.... [and] both the court and the parties may have difficulty remembering and understanding its terms. Finally, the potential for fraud, duress, or coercion is much greater where the agreement is not reduced to writing before being presented to the court.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Squirts v. Squirts

3. “By definition, an accord and satisfaction requires full performance of the terms of the compromise. Once the parties have fully complied with the terms of the compromise agreement, the doctrine is invoked and acts as a bar to all actions upon the same agreement. See 1A Michies, Accord & Satisfaction at § 1 Masse [v. Masse, 112 R.I. 599 ], 313 A.2d [642] at 645 [ (1974) ].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 228 W. Va. 441 - Haynes v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.