3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 9 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Houska v. Houska.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Houska v. Houska Anchor | green | “the commingling doctrine is a special application of the general presumption that all property acquired during marriage is community property.” | 3 |
| 2 | Papin v. Papin | green | “all property owned by a spouse before marriage and property acquired after marriage with the proceeds of separate property remain that spouse's separate property.” | 3 |
| 3 | Papin v. Papin | green | “commingling of separate and community property does not convert the separate property to community property where the separate property can be identified through either direct tracing or accounting.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.