Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2009 ND 164 - Tweeten v. Tweeten

Tweeten v. Tweeten’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
December 2022
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Fischer v. Fischer · Ruff v. Ruff · Heley v. Heley · Fox v. Fox · Hoverson v. Hoverson

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. “A premarital agreement is a contract, and its interpretation is a question of law, which this Court reviews de novo on the entire record.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The substantive enforceability of a premarital agreement is a matter of law to be decided by the court.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.