Stephens v. Stephens’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Stephens I " ). In Stephens I , Charles H. Stephens had *Page 195 appealed from a $65,872.25 judgment in favor of Helen Stephens, in her capacity as successor trustee of an inter vivos trust created by her husband, Roger Stephens, Charles's brother. The issue before this court was whether certain testimony of the trustee, John Sudderth, should have been considered by the trial court in reaching its judgment. Id. The facts were as follows. Sudderth served for a number of years as trustee. Upon his resignation in 1994, he filed with the court a final accounting, which showed that Charles had made payments totaling $32,000 on a $60,000 promissory note, with $7,500 being applied to the interest and the remaining $24,500 being applied to the principal. The accounting also included a "Reconciliation of Principal and Interest on Note,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 699 So. 2d 194 - Stephens v. Stephens

2. ““In the following eases, every agreement is void unless such agreement or some note or memorandum thereof expressing the consideration is in writing and subscribed by the party to be charged therewith or some other person by him thereunto lawfully authorized in writing: [[Image here]] “(7) Every agreement or commitment to lend money, delay or forebear repayment thereof, or to modify the provisions of such an agreement or commitment except for consumer loans with a principal amount financed less than $25,000.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Walsh v. Douglas

3. “"It is well settled that in a non-jury case, the trial judge is the finder of fact, and a presumption of correctness attaches to his findings and to the judgment based on these findings. The resulting judgment will not be disturbed on appeal unless it is manifestly unjust, palpably wrong, or without supporting evidence."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 699 So. 2d 194 - Stephens v. Stephens