Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 147 NEB 109 - Austin v. Austin

Austin v. Austin’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
5
states following
December 2023
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably State on Behalf of Hopkins v. Batt (1998), Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom (1991)

1 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

180194619501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Clasen v. Pruhs ex rel. Pruhs · Hahn v. Verret · Youngson v. Bond · American Trust & Banking Co. v. Balfour · Annable v. Ricedorff

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

  1. “"A person standing in loco parentis to a child is one who has put himself in the situation of a lawful parent by assuming the obligations incident to the parental relation, without going through the formalities necessary to a legal adoption, and the rights, duties, and liabilities of such person are the same as those of the lawful parent. The assumption of the relation is a question of intention, which may be shown by the acts and declarations of the person alleged to stand in that relation." 46 C.J., Parent and Child, § 174, p. 1334.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[a testator’s] intention to adeem [satisfy] a legacy may be shown by parol evidence, including that of the testator’s conduct subsequent to the execution of the will, and entries made in an account book and other memorandum [sic] properly identified, showing the amount of such payments, are admissible as proof of such satisfaction or ademption. When the evidence shows such an intention on the part of the testator to adeem or satisfy a legacy subsequent to the execution of the will, such intention is controlling, and the burden of disproving such intention is on the party denying it.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The construction of the devise by a probate court is solely for the guidance of the legal representatives of the estate, * *.”
    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.