Harkrader v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1947
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently November 1999 · most notably In Re Estate of Freshour (1959), United States v. Powell (1962)
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 42 state decisions
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 Zabel v. Stewart · Lampe v. Wille · Selzer v. Selzer · Tomb v. Bardo · Keeler v. Lauer
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In construing a will courts must (a) arrive at the intention of the testator from an examination of the whole instrument, if consistent with rules of law, giving every single provision thereof a practicable operative effect, (b) uphold it if possible, (c) avoid any interpretation resulting in intestacy when possible, (d) give supreme importance to the intention of the testator, and (e) when the language found in such instrument is clearly and unequivocally expressed determine the intent and purpose of the testator without resort to rules of judicial construction applicable to the interpretation of an instrument which is uncertain, indefinite and ambiguous in its terms.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““. . . charitable trusts are favorites of the law which must be upheld whenever possible, and . . . once it has been determined a will contains language creating such a trust other language to be found therein which is susceptible of more than one construction must be liberally construed for the purpose of carrying out the intention of the donor.” (p. 100.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The new Kansas Probate Code (G. S. 1945 Supp.,- eh. 59, art. 3) not only specifically confers jurisdiction upon the probate courts to administer trusts but makes ample provision for their supervision, direction and control.” (Syl. ¶ 4.)”
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.