Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 169 SW2D 989 - Whatley v. Whatley

Whatley v. Whatley’s Empirical Analysis

1943

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
May 1975
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1975

5 state decisions

201943195019601970decided

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 Leahy v. Timon · McKibban v. Scott · Clark v. Briley · Simpson v. Brotherton · Tannehill v. Tannehill

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

  1. ““In actions by or against executors, administrators, or guardians, in which judgment may be rendered for or against them as such, neither party shall be allowed to testify against the others as to any transaction with, or statement by, the testator, intestate or ward, unless called to testify thereto by the opposite party; and the provisions of this article shall extend to and include all actions by or against the heirs or legal representatives of a decedent arising out of any transaction with such decedent.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““. . . the term ‘parties’ embraces not only parties of record, but also all persons who have a direct and substantial interest in the matter litigated. A person has been said to have a disqualifying interest within the meaning of this rule, where he will be bound by any judgment which may be rendered under the pleadings.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““ ‘So the object of the act, excluding parties from testifying as to transactions with deceased persons, would be defeated by allowing one to testify to such transactions who was as fully interested in the result of the suit as any of the persons named as parties upon the record.’ ””
    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.