Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 150 NW2D 67 - Schulz v. Saeman

Schulz v. Saeman’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
August 2013
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently August 2013

6 state decisions

40196719701980199020002010decided

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 Graves v. First National Bank in Grand Forks · Manikowske Ex Rel. Bladow v. Manikowske · In Re Nystuen's Estate

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

  1. ““the county court had jurisdiction to construe the provisions of the will to determine who was entitled to the property in the estate, and the part of such property each person was entitled to receive. In making its determination as to the interest of each person in the property of the estate, it is necessary for the county court to construe that portion of the will giving the plaintiff a purported option to buy. The defendants now contend that the determination which was made by the county court was erroneous. If that is true, their remedy was to appeal from the final decree of distribution.” 150 N.W.2d at 70 .”
    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.