Ray v. Ray’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 19 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Plaintiff says he used part of the money to pay his lawyer. If the attorney was employed in connection with suing the defendant, or in reference to taking over the joint property — in other words, for a purpose antagonistic to the defendant — we think it can hardly be said to have been an expenditure for mutual benefit which would carry the implied consent or acquiescence. The same thing would be true of moneys spent for detectives to shadow the wife.” 336 S.W.2d at 738-39 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 32 Md. App. 644 - Sody v. Sody

2. ““Nevertheless, so much thereof as went to accomplishment of the common purpose of the parties should be considered as taken by a running or implied acquiescence.. . . [W]here the withdrawals are expressly or impliedly authorized or when they are applied to the mutual benefit of the parties or to the accomplishment of the common purpose. . . we think there is usually a ‘built-in’acquiescence. ” (Emphasis added.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 32 Md. App. 644 - Sody v. Sody

3. ““The fund withdrawn is still subject to the legal status of the estate, and it has stamped on it in the hands of the one who withdrew it all the elements of a trust.” (Quoting from Berhalter v. Berhalter, 315 Pa. 225, 227 , 173 A. 172, 173 ).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. White v. Roberts