Commonwealth Trust Co. v. DuMontimer’s Empirical Analysis
1916
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently May 1988 · most notably Malone v. Sullivan (1932), Rice v. Bennington County Savings Bank (1920)
1 federal appellate · 34 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 Whalen v. Milholland · Main's Appeal From Probate · Sanford v. . Sanford · Blasdel v. Locke · Municipal Securities Corp. v. Kansas City
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where one person gives to another a joint interest in property with himself no delivery to the donee is necessary, the possession of the donor being also that of the donee. . . . Similarly where a man deposited money in a savings bank to the credit of himself or wife, or the survivor, it was held that this created a joint ownership of the fund, and that the wile was entitled to it after the husband’s death as a gift from him, although she had never had possession of the pass book during his life. ’ ’”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““We have no authority in our state directly bearing upon this question. As noted by the supreme court in New Hampshire in Smith, Admx., v. Bank, supra, [64 N. H. 228] as well as by the vice chancellor in Dunn v. Houghton, supra, [51 Alt. 71] there is a very decided conflict of opinion on this question.” (p. 305.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Malone v. Sullivan
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.