Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 208 Okla. 477 - Anderson v. Davis

Anderson v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
November 2002
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently November 2002 · most notably Suagee v. Cook (1995), In Re Estate of Holcomb (2002)

4 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

80195219601970198019902000decided

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 Estate of Lances · Hurd v. Brown · In Re Estate of Nutt · Estate of Baird · Hunter v. Battiest

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

  1. “"When a will is prepared by the sole or principal beneficiary, who was the confidential agent, or who occupied a position of confidence or trust, to the testator, the instrument will not be held valid as a will unless it be affirmatively shown (a) that the testator read or knew its contents, and (b) had independent advice with reference thereto." (Emphasis added.)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “When the legal presumption of undue influence has arisen by showing confidential relations, whether in dispositions of property inter vivos or by will, the burden of proof is upon the party seeking to take the benefit of such disposition to rebut the presumption attaching hereto by showing either a severance of the confidential relations, or that the party making the disposition had competent and independent advice in regard thereto.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““A previously executed testamentary writing, conflicting with the propounded instrument, executed voluntarily and while decedent had recognized mental capacity, is an evidentiary fact from which undue influence or unsoundness of mind at the time of the later writing might be inferred, there being no explanatory facts.””
    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.