Enright v. Lehmann’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 19 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A] person who deposits funds in a multiple-party account normally does not intend to make an irrevocable gift of all or any part of the funds represented by the deposit. Rather, he usually intends no present change of beneficial ownership.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. NATKO (HELEN) VS. STATE · Natko v. State

2. “The language of the MPAA is unambiguous. In a controversy between parties to a multi-party account and their crédi-tors, funds in a joint account belong to the parties in proportion to their net contributions. A party’s net contribution is the amount of money deposited by or for him, less withdrawals made by or for him.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Savig v. First National Bank of Omaha

3. “`simple, inexpensive method of passing funds in the account from a deceased joint owner to the surviving joint owner, avoiding the necessity of probate proceedings.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Estate of Butler