Wamack v. Chesnutt’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently August 2000
15 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 In Re Estate of Cover · Harding v. Robinson · Estate of Yoell · 89 Cal. App. 2d 520 - Silver v. Shemanski · In re 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Neither is appellant entitled to a family allowance. Such income is specifically mentioned in the agreement, and is clearly comprehended among the benefits to be anticipated by a prospective husband. By reserving the ‘Exclusive right’ to dispose of all her property and income, decedent could have meant nothing other than that she was keeping all she had for herself and would bequeath it to anyone she might choose. Having by contract renounced all interest in and right to decedent’s property, appellant has no basis for demanding a family allowance. (Estate of Yoell, 164 Cal. 540, 550 [ 129 P. 999 ].) In Estate of Schwartz, 79 Cal.App.2d 308 [ 179 P.2d 868 ], where each contracting party had waived all claims to inherit, it was held that the right to a family allowance had been waived.””
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.