Kee v. Francis Camel Const.’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2018
5 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 430 So. 2d 256 - South Cent. Bell Telephone Co. v. Eisman
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When the concurrence of the spouses is required by law, the alienation, encumbrance, or lease of community property by a spouse is relatively null unless the other spouse has renounced the right to concur. [Emphasis added.] Comment “(b)” under this Article states: An act entered into by a spouse without the concurrence of the other spouse when such concurrence required by law is a relative nullity.”
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.