Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 66 R.I. 341 - Millman v. Streeter

Millman v. Streeter’s Empirical Analysis

1941

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
4
states following
June 2007
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently June 2007

14 state decisions

401941195019601970198019902000decided

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 Chippendale v. North Adams Savings Bank · New Jersey Title Guarantee & Trust Co. v. Archibald · Erwin v. Felter · Raferty v. Reilly · Industrial Trust Company v. Scanlon

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. ““She now argues that the money which was thus placed in the box belonged to her because a joint tenancy therein had been created by the above agreement; and that such agreement must be accepted as conclusive evidence of the existence of such tenancy. We cannot determine from the transcript whether this argument was made to the trial justice as clearly as it is now made to us. However, if we assume that it was so made and that the trial justice overlooked or misconceived it, the principal question is whether that agreement with the Citizens Safe Deposit Company conclusively created, as between Dr. Smith and the respondent, a true joint tenancy in the contents placed in the box by the doctor. “In our opinion the agreement, by itself, did not create a true joint tenancy. The law in this state recognizes that a joint tenancy may be held by two or more persons in personal as well as real property. General Laws 1938, chapter 431. See Industrial Trust Co. v. Scanlon, 26 R.I. 228, 231 , 58 A. 786 , 3 Ann.Cas. 863. However, in the absence of any other controlling statute, a true joint tenancy has always been characterized by the existence of all the four unities of time, title, interest and possession. “Under this agreement, the company had no title, interest, or possession in the money which it could transfer to the tenants at the time of the execution thereof. Only the safe deposit box was then in its control to lease to them¡ Nor does the agreement purport to use the company as a c”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““ ‘We agree to hire and hold Safe No. 7179 in the Citizens Safe Deposit Co.’s vault, as Joint Tenants, the survivor or survivors to have exclusive right of access thereto for any purpose including right to remove contents in case of death of either, and either to have power to appoint a Deputy. Either of the tenants has the right to surrender the safe. “‘We acknowledge a receipt from, the Citizens Safe Deposit Company covering rent of within described safe and agree to the rules and regulations as printed thereon and to such reasonable amendments or additions thereto as may be hereafter adopted We also acknowledge receipt of two keys. “ ‘Signed Bertha E. Streeter “ ‘Signed Sheffield Smith.’ ””
    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.