Cate v. Cate’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
November 1974
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Veal v. Thomason · 68 Tex. Crim. 295 - Burford v. State · Henry v. Phillips · Richardson v. Hart · Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority v. City of San Antonio
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The oral agreement he testified to, in legal effect gave to the survivor a life estate with power of sale, and a legal remainder in all property on hand on the death of the survivor to their children. “The wills as drawn and signed by ap-pellees’ parents gave to the survivor a fee simple title . . . “The oral contract as alleged and testified to by Steed, is in direct conflict with the written wills and is clearly within the statute of frauds and therefore improperly admitted over objection. This Court on appeal can only base its findings on competent admissible evidence and therefore cannot use as a basis for its findings of fact inadmissible evidence . . . “The parties having reduced their contract to writing, as contained in the written wills, and, absent allegations of fraud, accident or mistake, it is presumed that the writing is the repository of and contains the whole of the agreement made between them. The exception to the rule applies only where a consistent portion of the total agreement is oral ...””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kronenberger v. Beke
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.