Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 103 U.S. 22 - Prewit v. Wilson

Prewit v. Wilson’s Empirical Analysis

103 U.S. 22 · 1880

Citation profile

74
cited by 74 later decisions
10
cited 10 times by the Supreme Court
19
states following
May 2002
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 2 district · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 74 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2002 · most notably Davis v. Schwartz (1895), Stanley v. Schwalby (1896)

19 federal appellate · 2 district · 32 state decisions — followed in 19 states

1801880189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Hollingworth Magniac v. John R Thomson · Andrews & Bros. v. Jones

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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““When a deed is executed for a valuable and adequate consideration, without knowledge by the grantee of any fraudulent intent of the grantor, it will be upheld, however fraudulent his purpose. To vitiate the transfer in such case, the grantee also m'ust be chargeable with knowledge of the Intention of the grantor. * * * And an antenuptial settlement, though made with a fraudu lent design by the settlor, should not be annulled without the clearest proof of the wife’s participation in the intended fraud, for upon its annulment there can follow no dissolution of the marriage, which was the consideration of the settlement.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““An antenuptial settlement, though made with a fraudulent design by the settler, should not be annulled without the clearest proof of the wife’s participation in the intended fraud.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “but is a consideration of the highest value, and from motives of the soundest policy is upheld with a steady resolution.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.