22 Tenn. App. 321 - Smith v. Prichard’s Empirical Analysis
1938
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently November 1979
10 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 Davis v. Garrett · Stamper v. Venable · 18 Tenn. App. 523 - Couch v. Hoover · New Memphis Gaslight Co. · Gulf Refining Co. v. Frazier
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"If the vested right to the present or future enjoyment of some specific thing then owned by the donor, passes to a designated person, the instrument operates in praesenti, and is a deed; and the postponement of the possession and beneficial enjoyment until the death of the donor, does not make it a will." Sizer's Pritchard on Wills, Sec. 18, p. 19; Smith v. Pritchard, 22 Tenn. App. 321 , 122 S.W.2d 829 ; Couch v. Hoover, 18 Tenn. App. 523 , 79 S.W.2d 807 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Cockrell v. Tuell · Howell v. Davis
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.