Fix v. Fix’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 45 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Richard E. Ivie, Jimmie R. Ivie, LaDonna Small, and Bernard Ivie v. Arnold L. Smith and Sidney B. Smith (2014), O'Neal v. Southwest Missouri Bank (1997)
4 federal appellate · 45 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 Murphy v. Carron · Suhre v. Busch · In Re Estate of LaGarce · Edgar v. Fitzpatrick · Swon v. Huddleston
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A constructive trust is a method by which a court exercises its equitable powers to remedy a situation where a party has been wrongfully deprived of some right, title, benefit or interest in property as a result of fraud or in violation of confidence or faith reposed in another.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“clear, cogent and convincing as to exclude every reasonable doubt in the mind of the trial court.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence is not sufficiently clear, cogent and convincing so as to exclude every reasonable doubt that Billie accepted the designation of joint tenancy knowing of Catherine's [the decedent's] intent. The strongest evidence to support the trial court's finding of a "promise" by Billie to Catherine is Catherine's alleged statement to Mary Fix that Billie knew what Catherine wanted done. If admitted and believed, however, the statement does not constitute clear, cogent, and convincing evidence of an agreement by Billie to divide the money with the brothers, or show that Catherine created or maintained the joint tenancy in reliance on Billie's promise to divide the money with the brothers. . . Absent clear, cogent and convincing evidence of an agreement or understanding by Billie upon which Catherine relied so as to make disposition of her property by joint accounts with right of survivorship, there is insufficient proof to allow a finding of constructive fraud. Without proof of fraud, the titling of the account in Billie's name as a joint tenant with right of survivorship is conclusive evidence of Catherine's intent that the accounts vest in Billie upon Catherine's death.”
2 later decisions 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.