Meeks v. Olpherts’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 4 district · 20 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Actions for the recover of any property, real or personal, or for the possession thereof,' and ’ all actions founded upon contracts, may he maintained by and against executors and administrators in all cases in which the same might have been maintained by or against their respective testators or intestates.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lloyd v. Ball · Hyde v. Heller

2. ““The title upon which he [the administrator] is to recover is not his own title, nor that of the heirs or the creditors he represents, but the title of the intestate. The seisin upon which he must rely is the seisin which the deceased had at the time of his death. It is that title and that seisin which is put in issue, and the sufficiency of which is determined by the judgment rendered in the action. If the judgment be in favor of tlie administrator, it amounts to an adjudication that the title of the deceased, represented by the administrator, is superior to that upon which the defendant relies; and such a judgment would, upon that point, estop the defendant or his privies in a subsequent action brought for the recovery of the same premises in favor of the administrator, or the heirs, after distribution made, or in favor of any person who had subsequently succeeded to that title or to the right to assert it in court. All these consequences necessarily flow from the statutory right of the administrator to sue for the recovery of the estate of the deceased; otherwise, there is the anomaly of an action brought, and a judgment rendered upon the issue joined, by which judgment, however, nothing is, in effect, determined, and no one concluded.””

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

3. ““Tho first proposition, and, indeed, the argument of the learned counsel, concedes that, by virtue of the statutes of California, the real estate of a person dying intestate eomes to the possession and control of his administrator, as personal property does; and that, While the administrator can only sell real estate upon an order of the probate court, the possession and control, the reception of the rents and profits, and the right to sue to recover possession of it when held adversely, belong solely to the administrator.””

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