Beck v. Beck’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 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. “[Ojne purpose of the amendment was to uphold the intentions of spouses who entered into premarital agreements before 1980 ... and to supersede the effect of this court’s decision in Williams.... When the Texas Legislature originally proposed the adoption of the Spanish model of community property laws, it failed to include a constitutional provision incorporating the Spanish rule that future spouses could contract to rechar-acterize their property as they desired. Early court decisions interpreted our community property laws as establishing an inflexible system that forbade contracts attempting to recharacterize community property. These decisions were the legal manifestation of the now outmoded belief that women were not capable of managing their affairs and needed the law’s protection. We hold that the 1980 amendment to article XVI, section 15, of the Texas Constitution demonstrates an intention on the part of the legislature and the people of Texas to not only authorize future premarital agreements, but to impliedly validate section 5.41 of the Texas Family Code and all premarital agreements entered into pursuant to that statute. The legislature and the people of Texas have made the public policy determination that premarital agreements should be enforced.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Winger v. Pianka

2. “Tex. Const, art. XVI, § 15. 4 . This constitutional distinction between partition and exchange agreements and agreements concerning income from separate property was reflected by the 1981 and 1987 amendments to the Texas Family Code, enacted by the legislature to implement the 1980 amendment to article XVI, section 15, of the Texas Constitution. Although section 5.53 of the Texas Family Code authorizes agreements between spouses concerning income or property derived from separate property, the Texas Uniform Premarital Agreement Act does not expressly authorize such an agreement between”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Fanning v. Fanning

3. “voidable” rather than "void”). 3 . Non-substantive changes were made to this clause by constitutional amendment in 1987. Article XVI, section 15, of the Texas Constitution now provides, "spouses also may from time to time, by written instrument, agree between themselves that the income or property from all or part of the separate property then owned or which thereafter might be acquired by only one of them, shall be the separate property of that spouse_”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Fanning v. Fanning