Foster v. Carlin’s Empirical Analysis
200 F.2d 943 · 1952
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently February 2010 · most notably Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Brown (1966), Lowry v. International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders & Helpers of America (1958)
25 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 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 Strawbridge v. Curtiss · City of Indianapolis v. Chase Nat Bank of City of New York · Markham v. Allen · Waterman v. Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co. · Case of Broderick's Will
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he fact that complainant prays for incidental relief which the federal court is without jurisdiction to grant does not prevent an adjudication by the federal court of the rights of the respective parties in an estate.” Id. The district court followed that principle here and did not hold that the probate exception prevented adjudication of the rights of the parties under the trust documents. Nothing in Foster suggests that a federal court can ignore the probate exception and assume jurisdiction over a claim over which it would otherwise not have jurisdiction, if the relief sought is”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Turja v. Turja · Law v. Law“The law is well settled that the federal courts have no jurisdiction over matters within the exclusive jurisdiction of state probate courts. However, as to matters which do not involve administration of an estate or the probate of a will, but which may be determined in a separate action inter partes in the courts of general jurisdiction of the state, the federal courts do have jurisdiction if the requisite diversity of citizenship exists.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Turja v. Turja · Law v. Law“One who has been adjudged incompetent may change his domicile if, but only if, he has, since the adjudication of incompetency, acquired sufficient understanding and mental capacity to make an intelligent choice of domicile. After such adjudication, the burden of proving the subsequent acquisition of sufficient mental capacity is plainly on him who alleges 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.