126 Cal. App. 48 - Abels v. Frey’s Empirical Analysis
1932
Citation profile
59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently December 1997 · most notably 20 Cal. 2d 393 - Westphal v. Westphal (1942), 62 Cal. App. 2d 328 - Capital National Bank v. Smith (1944)
59 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 United States v. Throckmorton · Pico v. Cohn · Bacon v. Bacon · William Hill Co. v. Lawler · Estate of Davis
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““By giving the notice prescribed by the statute, the entire world is called before the court, and the court acquires jurisdiction over all persons for the purpose of determining their rights to any portion of the estate, and every person who may assert any right or interest therein is required to present his claim to the court for its determination. Whether he appears and presents his claim, or fails to, the action of the court is equally conclusive upon him, ‘ “subject only to be[ing] reversed, set aside, or modified on appeal. ’ ’ ’ The decree is as binding upon him if he fails to appear and present his claim, as if his claim, after presentation, had been disallowed by the court. . . . “A person who is interested in the estate of a deceased person, who has had the notice required by law, becomes in point of law an actor in the proceedings, and is bound by the result. ’ ’ (Also see Ringwalt v. Bank of America, 3 Cal.2d 680, 684-685 [ 45 P.2d 967 ] ; Estate of Smith, 4 Cal.App.2d 548 [ 41 P.2d 565 ].)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“‘' The presumption being that proper notice has been given when there is no allegation to the contrary, it is the duty of the person notified to make inquiry as to the proceedings pending.” (Italics added.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A person who is interested in the estate of a deceased person, who has had the notice required by law, becomes in point of law an actor in the proceedings, and is bound by the result. (Estate of Allen, 176 Cal. 632 [ 169 P. 364 ]; Nicholson v. Leatham, supra.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dabney v. Dabney
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.