Wagner v. Wagner’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently January 2023 · most notably Nelson v. Nelson Cattle Co. (1994), Arcon Construction Co. v. South Dakota Cement Plant (1984)
50 state decisions
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 State Highway Commission v. Hayes Estate · Estate of Staver v. Staver · Barbour v. First Citizens Nat. Bank of Watertown · In Re Lewis' Estate · 1 Wis. 2d 609 - Pfeifer v. Pfeifer
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“JOINT ACCOUNT — PAYABLE TO EITHER OR SURVIVOR We agree and declare that all funds now, or hereafter, deposited in this account are, and shall be our joint property and owned by us as joint tenants with right of survivorship, and not as tenants in common, and upon the death of either of us any balance in said account shall become the absolute property of the survivor. The entire account or any part thereof may be withdrawn by, or upon the order of, either of us or the survivor. It is especially agreed that withdrawals of funds by the survivor shall be binding upon us and upon our heirs, next of kin, legatees, assigns and personal representatives.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"Many joint deposits are established for the convenience or benefit of the original depositor. Whether or not the original depositor intended the joint account for his own convenience or for the benefit of the non- depositing payee is a factual question to be determined from all the facts and circumstances in the case. The form of the contract of deposit is not itself controlling. * * * In the absence of contrary evidence, however, it serves as prima facie proof of beneficial intent."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Miles v. Hanten“Whenever a deposit has been made or shall hereafter be made, in any bank in the names of two or more persons, payable to any of them or payable to the survivor of them, such deposit or any part thereof, or any interest or dividend thereon, may be paid to any one or more of said persons whether the other be living or not, and the receipt or acquittance of the person or persons so paid shall be a valid and sufficient release and discharge to the bank for any payment so made.”
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.