Stevahn v. Meidinger’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

23 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Tenants in common and joint tenants are said to stand in confidential relations to each other in respect to their interests in the common property and the common title under which they hold; -and the courts generally assert that it would be' inequitable to permit one, without the consent of the others, to buy in an outstanding adversary claim to the common estate and assert it for his exclusive benefit to the injury or prejudice of his co-owners; and, if one cotenant actually does acquire such claim, he is regarded as holding it in trust for the benefit of all his cotenants, in proportion to their respective interests in the common property, who seasonably contribute , their share of his necessary expenditures; the courts will not, ordinarily, permit one cotenant to acquire and set up for his exclusive benefit any claim adverse to the common rights; at least,. ' where all the cotenants derive title . from a common ancestor by descent, or from a common grantor by a single conveyance.’’’ 54 A.L.R. 75 . See citation of cases in this note supporting this statement of the rule. (Emphasis supplied.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Frandson v. Casey

2. ““ ‘We have been referred by counsel to no case, and in the course of a pretty thorough investigation have found none, in which it is held that payments made by one co-tenant beyond his just proportion, to reduce incumbrances, results in an expansion of the interest or ownership of such tenant in the common property. On the contrary, the doctrine of all the authorities seems to be that his interest, in such case, remains the same, but that, to the extent he has made payments beyond his share, he stands in the shoes of the creditor, to whom the payments have been made.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Eastman v. Nelson

3. ““In case a cotenant purchases an outstanding adverse title or claim to the common property, or pays a mortgage against the common property, or redeems the whole common property from the foreclosure of such mortgage, if the other cotenants ‘do not voluntarily contribute their respective shares of the cost within the reasonable time allowed by law, he can avail himself of the title thus acquired to compel them either to pay or to forfeit their interests in the property.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Eastman v. Nelson