Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 171 ILL 640 - Gavin v. Curtin

Gavin v. Curtin’s Empirical Analysis

1898

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
21
states following
September 1991
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 52 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 1991 · most notably Willing v. Chicago Auditorium Ass'n (1928), Ussery v. Darrow (1939)

1 federal appellate · 52 state decisions — followed in 21 states

13018981900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Dodge v. Cole · Curtiss v. Brown

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

  1. ““We think it well settled that a court of equity, if it 'has jurisdiction in a given, cause, cannot be deemed lacking in power to order the sale of real estate which is the subject of a trust on the ground alone that the limitations of the instrument creating the trust expressly deny the power of alienation. It is true, the exercise of that power can only be justified by some exigency which makes the action of the court, in a sense, indispensable to the preservation of the interests of the parties in the subject-matter of the trust, or possibly in case of some other necessity of the most urgent character. ’ ’”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Exigencies often arise not contemplated by the party creating the trust, and which had they been anticipated, would undoubtedly have been provided for where the aid of the court of chancery must be invoked to grant relief imperatively required, and in such cases the court must as far as may be, occupy the place of the party creating the trust and do with the fund what he would have dictated had he anticipated the emergency.”
    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.