Thomas v. Copenhaver’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently July 2007 · most notably Sturgis v. Stinson (1991), Frazer v. Millington (1996)
31 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 Powell v. Holland · Fenton v. Davis · Mumaw v. Mumaw · Trice v. Powell · Sutherland v. Sydnor
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he paramount rule in testamentary construction is that the intention of the testator controls. ... In ascertaining that intention, a court must examine the will as a whole and give effect, so far as possible, to all its parts. Although the language in a will may be obscure and uncertain, if the testator’s intention is ascertainable, his intention will prevail.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. West v. Hines
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.