Armstrong v. Martin’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently February 2012
2 federal appellate · 8 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 Hathaway v. Hoffman · Holmes v. Holmes · Tucker v. Leonard · In Re Estate of Wah-Kon-Tah-He-Ump-Ah · In Re Mize's Guardianship
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The phrases, `incompetent,' `mentally incompetent,' and `incapable' as used in title 58 O.S. 1941 §§ 851 and 852 mean any person who, though not insane, is, by reason of old age, disease, weakness of mind, or from any other cause, unable unassisted, to properly manage or take care of his property, and by reason thereof would likely be deceived or imposed upon by artful or designing persons."”
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.