Angichiodo v. Cerami’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 10 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Q. Did your wife sell that property back to her mother? A. My wife sell back to ber mama. “Q. Why did she sell back to your mother-in-law? A. Well, she was put in bad health. I was make nothing at all on property. I no be able to pay taxes. “Q. Did your mother-in-law sell the property back to you or your wife? A. To my wife; wouldn’t sell to me. “Q. Why? A. Because when I go into bankrupt it be in my wife’s name or I would lose altogether. I would have some property left, so she been take property so my wife she don’t lose. “Q. Did you sign the sale when Rosario, your wife, sold back to Mrs. Oddo, her mother? A. I not sign it. “Q. Were you present? A. We have argument over this matters. My wife want to turn over and I no want to sell, and my wife tell me, ‘My mama no take away from you but want to protect.’ I say I know but that is handling things and I am left out. I am not discussed with about it’ and she cry and I say, ‘I don’t want argue no more, if you want turn over to your mama go ahead.’ But, I say, T no sign.’ “Q. Did you ever sign it? A. Never asked me because I was too much strong against it. I say, ‘All right she want me to turn over place’, and I say, ‘All right’. You go ahead do what you want with place and I will do what I please. I no sign.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Angichiodo v. Cerami

2. ““The requisite of the Codal article that the husband should join in the sale of community property to make the deed valid is one, in the opinion of the court, subject to ratification, especially when the ratification is embodied in an authentic act as in the instant case. “We find a compliance with the Louisiana Code article previously cited. The important legal fact is that the husband joins in an authentic act. The fact that the authentic act happens to be one of partition between the other two parties of real estate does not render ineffectual the signature of and does not diminish the authority given by the husband.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Angichiodo v. Cerami