Lynch v. Rooney’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Subject to the provisions of Section 852, a voluntary trust is created, as to the trustor and beneficiary, by any words or acts of the trustor, indicating with reasonable certainty: “1. An intention on the part of the trustor to create a trust, and, “2. The subject, purpose, and beneficiary of the trust.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Feliz v. Thompson · 76 Cal. App. 3d 106 - Estate of Berges

2. ““It is insisted that the interveners, in asking this relief, are not attacking the decree of distribution, but are asking relief thereunder. Many cases are cited to .support tiiis contention, bnt they fall short of the mark, and present no question similar to the one here involved. The court in hearing the petition for distribution of the estate of Bryan Lynch, deceased, upon legal and proper notice to the entire world, took evidence as to who were the heirs of his estate, entitled to take the same, and thereupon made a finding of fact that Catherine Clark was a sister and the only heir, and, as a conclusion of law, held that said Catherine Clark was entitled to the entire estate. That decree has never been modified, nor even assailed, and, as far as any collateral attack is concerned, it must stand forever as binding and conclusive upon the question of heirship. Whatever counsel may say as recognizing the validity of the decree, and claiming under it, is not strictly true, for that decree declares as a fact that Catherine Clark is the only heir of Bryan Lynch; and, to give the interveners the relief here sought, that finding must be first set aside as untrue, and that cannot be done in this action. If such a thing could be done, the stability of judgments and decrees would be a thing of the past. Decrees of distribution would be as unstable as the sands, for omitted heirs from such decrees would be seeking to have involuntary trusts declared thereon at most inopijortune time”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Goodrich v. Ferris