Wright v. Matthews’s Empirical Analysis
1939
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently May 1981
11 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 Brown v. Mitchell · Pure Oil Co. v. Reece · Pure Oil Co. v. Reece · 54 Tex. Civ. App. 289 - Uecker v. Zuercher · 52 Tex. Civ. App. 275 - Williams v. Livingston
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(1) Cancelling, setting aside and holding for naught the deed dated July 10, 1937, from Genoa C. McGinley to Kathryn Hughes. “(2) Cancelling, setting aside and holding for naught the deed of trust executed on July 22, 1937, by Kathryn Hughes and husband to Nowlin Randolph, as trustee for the said Benjamin F. Wright. “(3) Cancelling, setting aside and holding for naught the deed of trust executed on August 18, 1937, by Kathryn Hughes and Foy T. Hughes, conveying said Lot 14 to John P. Forrest, to secure a note in the sum of $975, insofar as the sam.e affects the rights of Genoa C.’ McGinley. Also canceling power of attorney executed by Kathryn and Foy T. Hughes to John P. Forrest. “(4) The judgment based upon the condition that Frank W. Matthews, as guardian, pay into the registry of the court the sum of $232, to reimburse Kathryn and Foy T. Hughes for taxes paid by them, and the sum of $175 to reimburse the Hughes for the consideration paid. “(5) Granting personal judgment in favor of Benjamin F. Wright against Kathryn and Foy T. Hughes for the amount of principal and interest due on the Wright note, but allowing no foreclosure. “(6) Discharging C. N. Wideman as receiver of the property.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wright v. Matthews
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.