Higgins v. Trauger’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 3 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[I]t was the intention of Maria Higgins and her husband, William Higgins, to proceed in a manner and fashion designed and intended to permit Maria Higgins to acquire title by Tax Deed free and clear of any interest or estate of the then other co-owner, Harry Reynolds. [[Image here]] The actions of Maria Higgins and her husband, William Higgins, were designed to circumvent the provisions of the then applicable statute, N.D.C.C. § 57-24-18 so as to divest the other co-owner, Harry Reynolds, from any right, title or interest in and to the subject real property heretofore described. [[Image here]] [T]he actions of Maria Higgins and William Higgins constitute collusion to the extent that they were intended and designed to circumvent the application of the above-cited statute then in effect. [[Image here]] [A]s a matter of law the purchase of the' tax sale certificates by Maria Higgins constituted a redemption of the premises from the effect of the real estate tax sales for the benefit of her husband and the other co-owner of the premises, Harry Reynolds. [[Image here]] [A] redemption of the premises is deemed to have occurred and record title to the above-described real property is deemed vested in the then owners of the premises, William Higgins and Harry Reynolds, as tenants in common.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Higgins v. Trauger

2. “We conclude the auditor’s affidavit raises a genuine issue of material fact whether Maria and William Higgins entered into a collusive arrangement to avoid the prohibitions in N.D.C.C.'§ 57-24-18. If they did so, Maria Higgins’s purchase of the tax sale certificates should be treated as a purchase, or re demption, by William Higgins, and William Higgins and Reynolds should be restored to their prior status as co-owners of the disputed property. If they did not enter into a collusive arrangement, a writ of mandamus should issue compelling Trauger, the Morton County Auditor, to issue Maria Higgins the tax deeds to the property.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Higgins v. Trauger