McCarthy v. Foust’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The hardware company cites the case of of Sherman v. Havens, 94 Kan. 654 , 146 P. 1030 (Ann. Cas. 1917B, 394), in which it was held that, when the reason for the rule applied in Nelson v. Stull ( 65 Kan. 585 , 68 P. 617 , 70 P. 590 ) fails, the rule itself fails. In Sherman v. Havens, the executor was not simply an executor. He was testamentary trustee of a spendthrift trust, requiring payment to the beneficiary of $250 quarterly, in advance, from death of the testator to death of the beneficiary. The court held that no order for these payments was necessary, and, since the testator had not indicated that the payments were to be enjoyed free from claims of creditors, the executor-trustee was subject to garnishment. While in this instance it is likely that upon a hearing an order granting partial distribution would have been granted, hevertheless such an order was indispensable to liability of the administrator (o garnishment.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Russell v. Prospect Lodge No. 106, Knights of Pythias · Munz v. Hill