Weber v. Nedin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

23 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““All grants and devises of land made to two or more persons, except as provided in section 230.45, shall be construed to create estates in common, and not in joint tenancy, unless expressly declared to be in joint tenancy.””

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Perrigo v. Estate of Richardson · Hass v. Hass

2. ““This court, in common with tbe courts of New York and Illinois, has held that the use of the word ‘jointly’ is not by itself a sufficient declaration of an intent to create an estate in joint tenancy to overcome the statutory presumption (Fries v. Kracklauer, 198 Wis. 547 [ 224 N. W. 717 ]), although there is very respectable authority to the contrary. See 2 Thompson, Real Property, p. 934, § 1724, and cases cited. “The word ‘jointly’ as used in common parlance is a word applicable to estates in common as well as to joint tenancy. This is due to the fact that in each the right of possession is in all of the owners equally. ’ ’”

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

3. ““If the language in the deed had been ‘Tomas Nedin and Sofi Nedin, his wife, as joint tenants’ [the language used here], no one familiar with the language of conveyancing could have any doubt as to the intent of the parties [to create a joint tenancy].””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Neitge v. Severson