Adams v. Maris’s Empirical Analysis
1919
Citation profile
36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently February 1974 · most notably Hinson v. Hinson (1955), Burton v. Bell (1964)
36 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 Heidenheimer v. Bauman · McLane v. Paschal · Tozer v. Jackson · Fosselman v. Elder · Gordon v. Whitlock
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The words are not ambiguous to the extent that they are unmeaning, or inconsistent with themselves to the extent that parol evidence is not admissible to aid in making clear what they mean. Ferguson v. Ferguson, supra; Cyc. vol. 17, pp. 680-682; Jones on Evidence, § 473; Meyers v. Maverick, 28 S. W. 716 ; Page on Wills, 998; Schouler on Wills, § 581; Gardner on Wills, 388. The courts are reluctant to declare -wills, as well as contracts, void for uncertainty. They have in cases in which no question of fraud arises resorted to ‘every shift,’ rather than declare the gift void for such reason. Doe ex dem. Winter v. Parratt, 6 Man. & G. 362. While doubtless not a wise policy to go to such extreme to effectuate an uncertain intention, it is safe to follow the rule announced in Jones on Evidence, that ‘it is only when the instrument is unintelligible or uncertain after the extrinsic evidence as to the situation of the parties and the surrounding circumstances have been received, that a true patent ambiguity is established.’ Jones on Evidence, vol. 1, § 474.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Poss v. Kuhlmann
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.