Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 116 NEB 785 - Moffitt v. Williams

Moffitt v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

1928

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
January 1982
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1982

1 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

301928193019401950196019701980decided

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 Graves v. Wheeler · 58 Tex. Civ. App. 263 - Diamond v. Rotan · Kessner v. Phillips · Walker v. Shepard · Hill v. Hill

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

  1. “`It has been regarded by the courts that it is impossible to convey an absolute title to real estate in fee simple by deed or will, and at the same time in the same instrument convey to the same person a limited right or title in the same land. It therefore follows that when there was an attempt to do so, and no other disposition of the land was made in the will, the courts, on the theory that real estate must have an owner, rejected the attempt to convey the limited title, and treated the conveyance as of a fee simple title.' "... `The settled rule of law is that, if a deed or will conveys an absolute title in fee simple, an inconsistent clause in the instrument attempting merely to limit that title or convey to the same person a limited title in the same land will be disregarded.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “... `The settled rule of law is that, if a deed or will conveys an absolute title in fee simple, an inconsistent clause in the instrument attempting merely to limit that title or convey to the same person a limited title in the same land will be disregarded.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.