Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 160 VA 562 - Cowper v. Sargeant

Cowper v. Sargeant’s Empirical Analysis

1933

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
September 1968
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Kirby v. Kirby · Queensbury v. Vial

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

  1. ““In Queensbury v. Vial, 123 Va. 219 , 96 S.E. 173, 174 , it is held that a court of equity, has no inherent jurisdiction to set aside wills on the ground of fraud, undue influence, or lack of testamentary capacity on the part of the testator. ‘Jurisdiction of these questions is to be found solely in the statute on the subject.’ “In Kirby v. Kirby, 84 Va. 627 , 5 S.E. 539 , Judge Lewis said: ‘It is contended that in a suit of this description a court of equity does not proceed under its general jurisdiction, with all the powers incident thereto, but can exercise only the special and limited powers conferred upon it by the statute; that it acts as a court of probate, with a single object in view, namely, to ascertain by a jury trial whether the paper in question is or is not the will of the decedent; that it can perform no other act, nor grant any further relief; that it has no jurisdiction over the estate of the decedent, and can make no order respecting it.”
    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.