Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 113 U.S. 89 - Griffith v. Godey

Griffith v. Godey’s Empirical Analysis

113 U.S. 89 · 1885

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
14
states following
April 1972
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 4 district · 37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1972 · most notably 32 Cal. 2d 13 - Jorgensen v. Jorgensen (1948), United States ex rel. Hine v. Morse (1910)

5 federal appellate · 4 district · 37 state decisions — followed in 14 states

1101885189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Allore v. Jewell · Curtis v. Sutter

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

  1. ““It is well established that a settlement of an administrator’s account, by the decree of a probate court, does not conclude as to property accidentally or fraudulently withheld from the account. If the property he omitted by mistake, or be subsequently discovered, a court of equity may exercise its jurisdiction in the premises, and take such action as justice to the heirs of the ■deceased or to the creditors of the estate may require, even if the probate court might, in such case, open its decree and administer upon the omitted property; and a fraudulent concealment of property, or a fraudulent disposition of it, is a general and always existing ground for the interposition of equity.””
    3 later decisions 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.