Cross v. Manning’s Empirical Analysis
1947
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently November 2003 · most notably Armstrong v. Butler (1977), 83 Ark. App. 354 - Metzgar v. Rodgers (2003)
24 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 Cribbs v. Walker · Bernstein v. Bramble · Union Trust Company v. Madigan · Moody v. Walker · Wooldridge v. Gilman
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““1. The paramount principle in the construction of wills is that the general intention of the testator, if not in contravention of public policy or some rule of law, shall govern. 2. That intent must be ascertained from the whole will taken together; and no part thereof to which meaning and operation can be given, consistent with the general intention of the testator, shall be rejected. Where the words of one part of a will are capable of a two-fold construction, that should be adopted which is most consistent with the intention of the testator, as ascertained by other portions of the will. * * * * * * 8. When the expression which a testator uses is really ambiguous, and is fairly capable of two constructions, one of which would produce a legal result, and the other a result which would be bad for remoteness, it is a fair presumption that the testator meant to create a legal rather than an illegal interest . . . and therefore the fact that a provision would be too remote, if construed in a certain way, is a reason for supposing that it was not intended to be construed in that way, which, although it cannot avail against a clear form of wording, may well be held to govern when the expression is ambiguous.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Carroll v. Robinson
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.