116 W. Va. 554 - Wilson v. Starbuck’s Empirical Analysis
1935
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently November 1983
20 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 9 E.H. Smith 555 - Edson v. . Parsons · Frazier v. Patterson · Rastetter v. . Hoenninger · Carmichael v. Carmichael · Canada v. Ihmsen
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It must be pointed out, however, that this conclusion is not reached by holding in this case that where the wills are mutual with reciprocal provisions but not joint, that the wills themselves, without proof of the circumstances under which they were drawn and executed, are sufficient evidence to establish the contract. There are no declarations nor recitals in these wills that would be sufficient for that purpose. The general rule is, undoubtedly, in the case of mutual, but not joint wills, that the making of the wills themselves, although evidential of the contractual relationship, is insufficient to establish that relationship. The wills before us, with nothing more than their due execution shown, undoubtedly would fall within that rule.” (p. 558.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The authorities seem to be in agreement on the proposition that where one party to a contract to make mutual wills has fully performed the undertaking and has died, the contract is enforceable in equity against the estate of the survivor.””
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.