Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 134 Okla. 70 - Nolan v. Mathis

Nolan v. Mathis’s Empirical Analysis

1928

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
April 1951
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 1951

11 state decisions

601928193019401950decided

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 Collins v. Johnson · Porter v. Wilson · Lowrance v. Henry · Fouts v. Nance · Penny v. Vose

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. ““In the consideration of cases involving-oral gifts of real estate, certain general principles are to be remembered: (1) The proof of such gifts, together with every element necessary to complete the same must be strong, clear and convincing. Fouts v. Nance, 55 Okla. 266 , 155 Pac. 610 ; 28 C. J. 681. It has been held in Howard v. Stephens, 38 Cal. A. 296, 176 Pac. 65 , and in Humble v. Gay, 168 Cal. 516 , and Martin v. Martin (Tex. Civ. App.) 207 S. W. 188 , that gifts first asserted after the death of the donor are regarded with suspicion. (2i) The law regards with a jealous eye transfers of real estate, and especially will it scrutinize closely alleged gifts of such property made without any attempt to observe the statutory requirements as to method of transfer. This is shown clearly by our statute of frauds, and we think the case at bar furnished evidence of the wisdom of this statute.’’”
    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.