Boxberger v. Cotten’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In our opinion the trial court’s conclusion that the antenuptial agreement is void on the ground it ‘creates an incentive to cause a divorce’ is erroneous. . . . The operative words relating to the devise by the decedent are ‘if First Party [Mary] shall survive him as his widow.’ “The only limiting words in the agreement are that Mary survive the decedent as his widow. On the facts of this case she did survive him. Ambiguity results from the use of words capable of two or more meanings. An agreement conditioned upon a single fact, survival as widow, means just one thing — that the parties be married at the death of the husband. On the facts of this case they were married upon the death of J. Ben Boxberger. “The trial court’s conclusion that the agreement of the parties would control a settlement of their property rights in the event of divorce, and that the decedent had a substantial pecuniary benefit in the procurement. of a divorce, is unfounded. The parties to the antenuptial agreement here in question made no agreement whatever concerning property rights in the event of divorce. The only logical construction of the contract is that the property rights of the parties would be determined by the court in a divorce proceeding without reference to the agreement, since it dealt only with property rights in the event of death. The contract created no obligation or undertaking for either party in the event of divorce. Neither party agreed to do, or not to do, any act, nor did ei”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Estate of Murdock

2. ““Where an antenuptial contract is clear and unambiguous, the terms thereof must be construed in such manner as to give effect to the intention of the parties at the time they entered into the contract, and this must be determined from the four corners of the instrument itself without the aid of parol evidence. Words cannot be read into the agreement which impart an intent wholly unexpressed when it was executed.” (Syl. ¶ 3.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Estate of Murdock