Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 3 ARIZAPP 436 - Jacobs v. Jacobs

Jacobs v. Jacobs’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
June 1969
most recently cited

Relationships

Relies on Porter v. Porter · 60 Wash. 2d 122 - DeHeer v. Seattle Post-Intelligencer · Ely v. New Mexico & Arizona Railroad · Silva v. Traver · Rossi v. Stewart

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. “The money was originally community funds earned during the marriage of Caroline and Edward Jacobs, and later placed in a joint account. Plaintiffs contend that when the community funds were placed in the joint account they lost their community character and that real property purchased from the joint account by either became the sole and separate property of the one taking it in his own name. Defendants take the position that community funds placed in a joint account for the convenience of the husband and wife do not lose their community property character unless the result is clearly intended, citing In re Baldwin’s Estate, 50 Ariz. 265 , 71 P. 2d 791 (1937); Evans v. Evans, 79 Ariz. 284 , 288 P. 2d 775 (1955), as authority. The evidence is clear that Arthur Jacobs purchased the land with funds earned by Edward Jacobs during his marriage to Caroline Jacobs. Edward testified that he intended to hold the land as community property, and that he considered the funds in the joint account as community funds. Property acquired subsequent to marriage, except through gift, devise or descent, is presumed to be community property unless shown to be otherwise by clear and satisfactory evidence. Evans v. Evans, supra; A.R.S. § 25-211.”
    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.