Hafner v. Schmitz’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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

1. ““This court has had many occasions to apply the rules governing cases involving the matter of undue influence. Claggett v. Claggett, 204 Minn. 568 , 284 N. W. 363 ; In re Estate of Stephens, 207 Minn. 597 , 293 N. W. 90 ; Shaughnessy v. Shaughnessy, 135 Minn. 262 , 160 N. W. 769 . One of these rules is that where ‘confidential relations exist between parties and one of them by means of the relation secures from the other an inequitable advantage, equity will set aside the transaction.’ Claggett v. Claggett, supra, at 204 Minn. p. 572, 284 N. W. p. 365; Fischer v. Sperl, 94 Minn. 421 , 103 N. W. 502 ; Naeseth v. Hommedal, 109 Minn. 153 , 123 N. W. 287 . The influence must be such that it overcomes the volition of the person influenced. And the burden of proof is upon the party asserting it. Naeseth v. Hommedal, supra; 1 Page, Wills (Lifetime ed.) § 185. Unless the evidence is conclusive one way or the other, the question is one of fact and, like any other question of fact, is for the fury or trial court. In re Estate of Stephens, supra; Schultz v. Brennan, 195 Minn. 301 , 262 N. W. 877 ; Woodville v. Morrill, 130 Minn. 92 , 153 N. W. 131 . “In the instant case the facts hereinabove recited show a confidential relationship; they show an opportunity for the one to take advantage of the other; and an inclination to do so, clearly evidenced by previous attempts. These, together with the result here attained, are sufficient to warrant a finding of undue influence. In re Estate of S”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Agner v. Bourn