99 Ark. App. 371 - Singleton v. Singleton’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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. “Appellant’s argument focuses on the fact that the funds used to purchase the home, vehicles, and other property came from her personal-injury settlement. The trial court could have decided that, because the settlement money was deposited into joint accounts and was used to purchase, among other things, a house titled in both names, it lost its character as appellant’s separate property. See McKay v. McKay, 340 Ark. 171 , 8 S.W.3d 525 (2000); Lofton v. Lofton, 23 Ark.App. 203 , 745 S.W.2d 635 (1988). Placing the funds from her settlement into joint accounts created a presumption that appellant intended to make a gift to appellee of one-half of the settlement proceeds. Appellant offered no testimony seeking to rebut this presumption, and it was her burden to do so. See Davis v. Davis, 79 Ark.App. 178 , 84 S.W.3d 447 (2002). Moreover, one spouse’s unequal contributions to marital property need not be recognized upon divorce. McKay, supra.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2009 Ark. App. 273 - Ransom v. Ransom