Cook v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “. “It is asserted that the entire income during this marriage, (except some building rentals in fixed amounts) was oil royalty income of the first community or of W. H. Cook’s separate estate ; and therefore any personalty purchased therefrom belongs to these estates. “In 1943 Cook opened an account in a Grand- Saline bank with a $2,057.55 deposit. During the next fourteen years of his second marriage until his death, there were hundreds of unidentified deposits and withdrawals “Dividends, interest, loan repayments and other income from Cook’s separate estate were deposited in this account. The evidence shows that Cook engaged in commercial enterprises during this second marriage, and, although there is no affirmative showing that royalty income was deposited in the account, apparently all income, separate and community, was indiscriminately intermingled. Appellants offered evidence of totals or estimates of royalty income of the first community, but there is nothing in the record to segregate or determine the source of the deposits in the account. “The presumption concerning the separate property status of hank accounts fixed by Art. 4622, Vernon’s Ann.Tex.Civ.Stats., is inapplicable since the action is between a spouse and successors of a spouse. The commingled funds, out of which the personalty was acquired, became community property as determined by the trial court. Hodge v. Ellis, 154 Tex. 341 , 277 S.W.2d 900, 907 . The presumption of Art. 4619, Sec. 1: ‘all the effects”

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