Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 F.2d 201 - Smith v. Westover

Smith v. Westover’s Empirical Analysis

237 F.2d 201 · 1956

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
October 1960
most recently cited

8 federal appellate ·

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.

  1. ““Furthermore, it would seem that an obvious device of this sort by husband and wife to provide for the future of their minor children without any business purpose involved should not be sanctioned. This business bad been operated as community property and was under the control of the husband. The capital which was taken out for the purpose of making it under the sole control of the husband was paid back in and the wife and children given ostensible interests for no apparent purpose except to build up an estate in the children at the expense of the United States. We thinh the law does not require us to sanation such an obvious device.” 237 F.2d 201 . (Emphasis added.)”
    2 later decisions 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.