Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 219 ILL 182 - Noble v. Tipton

Noble v. Tipton’s Empirical Analysis

1905

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
10
states following
September 1979
most recently cited

34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently September 1979 · most notably Merchants' Loan & Trust Co. v. Patterson (1923), Evans v. Boney (1942)

34 state decisions — followed in 10 states

8019051910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Massey v. Huntington · Dean v. O'Meara · Hunt ex rel. City of Streator v. Evans · Lange v. Cullinan · Beatty v. Clegg

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

  1. ““ = * a recital in a will is to the effect that the testator has devised something in another part of the will when in fact he has not done so, the erroneous recital may operate as a- devise by implication of the same property, for the reason that it shows an intention to devise the property by the will; but where the recital is to' the effect that the testator has by some other instrument given to a certain person named in the recital, property, when in fact he has not done so, such a recital does not disclose an intention to give by the will, and in such a case resort must be had to the other instrument and not to the will.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““. . . Thomas Noble in his answer and cross-bill set up the making of the improvements while in possession of the farm as the ground for insisting upon his ownership and the validity of the deed. There was evidence that he made the improvements, and where one of several tenants in common has made .improvements upon the property, the court should, if possible, allot to him the portion improved without taking into account the value of the improvements.””
    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.