Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 223 ILL 535 - Andrews v. Applegate

Andrews v. Applegate’s Empirical Analysis

1906

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
5
states following
May 2024
most recently cited

15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently May 2024

15 state decisions

501906191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Bates v. Gillett · Adams v. Akerlund · Union National Bank v. Byram · Biggerstaff v. VanPelt

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

  1. ““The word ‘effects’ in its primary and ordinary meaning includes only personal estate, goods, movables and chattel property. [Citations.] It denotes property in a more extensive sense than goods, and includes all kinds of personal property, such as shares of capital stock. [Citation.] The word is frequently found in wills, and, as a general thing, means personal property ***.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Words used in a will are to be given the meaning which the testator intended they should have * * *”
    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.