Stemniski v. Stemniski’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 76 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 85 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Hack v. Hack (1981), Clingerman v. Sadowski (1986)
3 federal appellate · 76 state decisions
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.
Relationships
Relies on Madden v. Glosztonyi Savings & Trust Co. · Berhalter v. Berhalter · O'Malley v. O'Malley · Werle v. Werle · Lindenfelser v. Lindenfelser
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 85 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A violation of the rules by one spouse’s appropriating the property to his own use works a revocation of the estate [by the entireties] by the fiction of appropriation’s being an offer of an agreement to destroy the estate and an acceptance of that offer when the other spouse starts suit; the property is then fit for accounting and division.””
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where both husband and wife have the power to withdraw funds deposited in a joint account, the power must be exercised in good faith for the mutual benefit of both, and cannot be rightly exercised by the fraudulent withdrawal of the corpus of the funds for the exclusive use of one for the purpose of depriving the other of any use thereof or title thereto.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“merely the unit that has been improperly drawn upon.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.