Pope v. Cauffman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[T]he court does not believé that Kansas has of would adopt a rule that an insured’s act of changing a beneficiary while subject to a temporary restraining order restraining the parties to a divorce action from selling, encumbering or disposing of the parties’ property, automatically results in the voidance of the insured’s change in the designation of the beneficiary.” Pope v. Cauffman, 885 F. Supp. 1451, 1456 (D. Kan. 1995).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Nicholas v. Nicholas

2. “generally barring the sale or dissipation of the couple's assets does not prevent the insured from changing the named beneficiary.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Minnesota Mutual Life Insurance v. Ensley