247 Ga. App. 419 - Bonner v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
November 2016
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Gordy Tire Co. v. Dayton Rubber Co. · Tucker v. Talmadge · First Union National Bank v. Davies-Elliott, Inc. · Baker v. Goddard · 237 Ga. App. 733 - Rolleston v. Cherry
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Now, in this case it’s the responsibility of KeyBank to prove every essential part of its claims by a preponderance of the evidence. This is sometimes called the burden of proof or the burden of persuasion. A preponderance of evidence simply means an amount of evidence that is enough to persuade you that Key’s claim is more likely true than not true. [[Image here]] When a creditor attacks a conveyance from a husband to a wife, slight circumstances may be sufficient to establish the existence of fraud. The burden is on the husband and wife to show that the conveyance as a whole is free from fraud. [[Image here]] In determining whether Mr. Overend transferred his property with actual intent to delay, hinder, or defraud his creditors, you may consider the following factors .... One, whether the transfer or obligation was to an insider. And any relative of Mr. Overend is considered an insider if they are related within the third Levitical degree, which is nephews or closer. Whether Mr.—second, whether Mr. Overend retained possession or control of the property, transferred—that is, the property transferred after the transfer, whether he retained possession or control. Three, whether Mr. Overend disclosed or concealed the transfer. Four, whether, because the transfer was made, Mr. Overend had been sued or threatened with suit. Five, whether the transfer was substantially all of Mr. Overend’s assets. Six, whether Mr. Overend absconded. Seven, whether he removed or concealed the asse”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.