Fannie Seidenberg v. Martha E. Seidenberg’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 1989
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 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 Nichols Assignee v. Eaton et al. · Shelton v. King · Zouck v. Zouck · Moorehead's Estate · Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. Robertson
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although a trust is a spendthrift trust or a trust for support, the interest of a beneficiary can be reached in satisfaction of an enforceable claim against the beneficiary, (a) by the wife or child of the beneficiary for support, or by the wife for alimony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“repugnant to prevailing law or public policy.”
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.