Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 25 Tenn. App. 239 - Moore v. Chase

25 Tenn. App. 239 - Moore v. Chase’s Empirical Analysis

1941

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
November 1974
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently November 1974

8 state decisions

401941195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

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

  1. ““Necessarily the interest of a tenant by the entirety . in real estate is of such less value than that of the sole and unconditional owner. ‘ ‘ It is true that as tenants by the entirety the. husband and wife are regarded as one. It is, however, a composite one. The unit consists of both husband and wife. Certainly, in a technical sense, the husband is not the sole and unconditional owner of property held by him and his wife as tenants by the entirety, nor is he such owner for practical purposes. He cannot sell or incumber anything but his interest. We have heretofore shown that the interest of the tenant by the entirety is of little more value than the interest of the life tenant. ’ ’”
    1 later decision 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.