Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 143 KAN 860 - Steward v. Marker

Steward v. Marker’s Empirical Analysis

1936

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
June 1949
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Medill v. Snyder · Wisner v. Chandler · Bradley v. Hill · Harbison v. Beets

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““. . . We shall not prolong this opinion by a statement of the evidence bearing on this question, but since the case is to be tried again, simply mention it as a question that should receive due consideration. The rules of law pertaining to such insane delusions are sufficiently discussed in former decisions of this court (citing cases) and other authorities readily accessible. It is familiar law that one laboring under an insane delusion which influences him to make a will in a certain way does not possess testamentary capacity.” (1. c. 167.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The trial court considered this case and reached a conclusion as to the facts on conflicting testimony. Under such circumstances the result will not be disturbed.” (Steward v. Marker, 143 Kan. 860, 865 , 57 P. 2d 75 .)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.