125 Ind. App. 63 - Noyer, Exr. v. Ecker’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently July 1985
3 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
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 Wiley v. Gordon · 115 Ind. App. 253 - Daugherty v. Daugherty · Rarick v. Ulmer · 116 Ind. App. 517 - Keplinger v. Ward
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is well settled that not all mental weakness or insanity is sufficient to set aside a duly executed will. Only where the testator does not have sufficient mental capacity at the time of making the will to know the extent and value of his property, the number and names of those who were the natural objects of his bounty, their deserts with reference to their conduct toward and treatment of him, will the law invalidate the will, Daugherty et al. v. Daugherty et al. (1945), 115 Ind. App. 253, 267 , 57 N. E. 2d 599 ; Keplinger v. Ward et al. (1946), 116 Ind. App. 517, 520 , 65 N. E. 2d 644 ; Wiley et al. v. Gordon et al. (1914), 181 Ind. 252 , 104 N. E. 500 ; Rarick et al. v. Ulmer, by Next Friend (1895), 144 Ind. 25 , 42 N. E. 1099 . “While undue influence is not susceptible to precise definition, it may be broadly defined as the unlawful imposition of the power and will of the perpetrator whereby the victim is forced to do an act which is not his voluntary act but rather the act of the perpetrator. What constitutes undue influence depends on the circumstances in a particular case. Daugherty et al. v. Daugherty et al., supra; Wiley et al. v. Gordon et al., supra.”
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.