Starlin v. Love’s Empirical Analysis
1938
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently March 2004
16 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 Broughton v. Bradley · Castleberry v. Hollingsworth · Curtis v. Williams · Carpigiani v. Hall · Fields v. Fields
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““While the court has an inherent right to revoke letters, that right is within the limit of certain bounds, and must be for cause. ... It can only be done when some other person has a prior right either under a will or the law, and has not waived that right and is seeking to enforce it, or when the person appointed is unfit or disqualified.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCord v. Stephens
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.