Linton v. Hail’s Empirical Analysis
1924
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently February 2010
16 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 Harvey v. Bell · Bradshaw v. Williams · Duncan v. Duncan · Hughes v. Covington · Anderson v. Herring
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. Where an estate is devised to one for life, with remainder to another, and it is further provided if the remainderman die without children or issue, then to another, the rule is that the words ‘dying without children or issue’ are restricted to the death of the remainderman before the termination of the particular estate. “2. Where property is devised to one or more infants, to be held by trustees or guardians until they are of age, and then turned over to them or divided between them, with the provision that if any of them die without issue it shall go to the survivor or survivors, or if all die to a third person, the limitation as to ‘ dying without issue ’ is to be limited to a death in infancy before the period of distribution. “3. Where by the instrument there is a devise-to a class, and the period of division is postponed, even where the devisees are not infants, the rule is that the limitation as to dying without issue has reference to a death without issue before the period of division fixed.' “4. On the contrary, where there is no intervening estate, and no other period to which the words ‘dying without issue’-can be reasonably said to have reference, they are held, in the absence of something in the will showing a contrary purpose, to create a defeasible fee, which may be defeated by the death of the devisee'at any time without issue surviving him. ’ ’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Atkinson v. Kern“the interpretation of wills is to ascertain from the whole instrument the meaning of the testator, ... but where, ... there is doubt or uncertainty as to the meaning in any respect, then the courts, from necessity, must resort to certain rules of interpretation which time and experience have demonstrated will in the greater number of instances effectuate that meaning.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Graham v. Fulkerson
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.