Rakhman v. Zusstone’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 5 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he proper allocation of the burden of going forward would have been to note that the placing of title by Zusstone in Rakhman raised a rebuttable presumption that he had made a gift to Rakh-man, the natural object of his bounty. Once Zusstone put in his own testimony and the evidence of his prior real estate transaction history, Rakhman bore the “risk of nonpersuasion,” as opposed to the more demanding “clear and convincing” standard of proof required to establish a trust. This burden can also be described as the “preponderance of the evidence” or “more probably true than not.” R. Lawson, The Kentucky Evidence Law Handbook, § 9.00, at 517 (3d ed.1993).”

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

2. “a conveyance on a consideration from a husband, parent, or other person, -where title is taken in the name of the.wife, child, or other natural object of the purchaser’s bounty, generally does not raise, and, on the contrary, rebuts, a resulting trust, and raises a presumption of a gratuitous settlement on the wife, child, or other object of the bounty ... But the presumption of a settlement or gift is rebuttable by proof of a contrary intention, and on such rebuttal a resulting trust arises.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Spotts v. United States