Dilks v. Carson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 13 state decisions

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

1. ““When any testator omits tcrprovide ~ in his will for any of his children,' or-for the issue of any deceased- child-' unless it appears that stich omission'' was intentional, such child, or the issue of such'child, must have the same share in the estate of the testator, as if he had died intestate, and succeeds thereto-as provided in the preceding section.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. O'NEILL v. Cox · Monroe v. Lawrence

2. “Where the language of a will gives rise to an uncertainty as to whether a testator intentionally omitted to provide for a child or the issue of deceased child, the intention of the testator may be ascertained by interpreting such language in the light of the circumstances under which the will was made, excluding the oral declarations of testator.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Estate of Glomset

3. “I have no child nor children except William Dilks and Gladys Dilks ... and I do hereby exclude any and all other persons claiming to be my child....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Akers v. Hodel