Harrell v. Hickman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 federal appellate · 120 state decisions

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

1. ““The consequences of a holding that after the death of T. M. Harrell the remaindermen could be heard to come into court and inquire into the purposes of deeds made by him during .his lifetime are not difficult to perceive. Each conveyance had the effect of reducing the estate which would otherwise have gone to the remaindermen, and it might be that a jury would find that, since it had that effect, it was executed for that purpose and was therefore a fraudulent conveyance. Titles to property should not rest on such uncertain bases. The point need not be labored, for it has been definitely decided by this Court that under wills of similar effect as that before us, where the survivor takes a conditional fee, or even a life estate, with full power of disposition, he may dispose of the property as he sees fit during his lifetime. Hanna v. Ladewig, 73 Tex. 37 , 11 S.W. 133 ; Young v. Campbell, Tex.Civ. App., 175 S.W. 1100 , writ refused; Johnson v. Kirby, Tex.Civ.App., 193 S.W. 1074 , writ refused; Feegles v. Slaughter, Tex.Civ.App., 182 S.W10, writ refused; Kilpatrick v. Cassel, Tex.Civ.App., 19 S.W.2d 805 .” 215 S.W.2d at page 879.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Phinney v. Kay · Scales v. Scales

2. “In the instant case the testators in language free from ambiguity have clothed the survivor with the unqualified right to convey the property during his or her lifetime and have limited the rights of the remaindermen to whatever estate remained in the survivor at his or her death * * *.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Phinney v. Kay · Dickerson v. Keller

3. “"No provision in the will or contract places any limitation whatever upon the right of T. M. Harrell during his lifetime to dispose of the estate in any manner he might see fit. The will evidences that each of the testators reserved in himself or herself, should he or she become the survivor, the absolute right to dispose of the estate as such survivor might desire, with the single exception that the survivor could not make a disposition thereof by will contrary to that made in their joint will. It was clearly the intention of the testators that only the property remaining on hand at the death of the survivor should vest in the named beneficiaries or remaindermen, including respondent. That such beneficiaries should have no rights to or interest in any of the estate, except such portion thereof as remained undisposed of by the survivor at the time of his death, is made free of doubt by the provision in the fourth paragraph that only after the death of both testators, and not before, the remainder of the property of which the survivor should die seized and possessed shall pass to them."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Knolle v. Hunt · Hamilton v. Hamilton