Hancock v. Hancock’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Mitsubishi International Corporation v. Cardinal Textile Sales Inc (1994), Estate of Spruill v. Commissioner (1987)
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 Guffin v. Kelly · Jenkins v. Lane · Anderson v. Goodwin · Hadaway v. Hadaway · Pittman v. Pittman
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]henever the legal title is in one person, but the beneficial interest, either from the payment of the purchase money or other circumstances, is either wholly or partially in another.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Bringing the illustration squarely within the facts of the present case, if A, a father, deeds land to B, a son, not upon a good and valuable consideration, though such consideration might be recited in the deed, but for the purpose of the son’s obtaining, a loan on the land and reconveying to the father, a resulting trust would arise in favor of the father. Simpson Grocery Co. v. Knight, 148 Ga. 410 , 96 S.E. 872 ; Peppers v. Peppers, 194 Ga. 10, 12 , 20 S.E.2d 409 . * * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The court continued, saying: (a) Where a grantee holds property impressed with a constructive trust in favor of the grantor, and conveys such property to another, who has notice and knowledge of the circumstances creating the constructive trust, the latter takes the property subject to the equities of the original grantor, and is a proper party in a suit seeking to impress the property with a constructive trust.”
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.