105 Ind. App. 46 - Cunningham v. Teague’s Empirical Analysis
1937
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently January 1976
9 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
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 Devol v. Dye · Jacobs v. Jolley · Grant Trust & Savings Co. v. Tucker · Gammon Theological Seminary v. Robbins · Hayes v. McKinney
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * the gift must be fully executed by a delivery of the property by the donor to the donee, or to some third person for the use and benefit of the donee. It must appear that the donor intentionally parted with control over the property given in order that the donee should receive it, to constitute delivery.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““It seems clear that she did not intentionally part with control over this investment stock at any time, and this she must have done in order to make a valid gift inter vivos."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Tracy Price (the donor) or Mable Teague or Georgia Cunningham, Joint Account payable to the order of either of them, before or after the death of the other * *.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wilt v. Brokaw
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.