Flower v. Dort’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 2003
2 federal appellate · 10 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 McMurry v. Stanley · Kenaday v. Sinnott · Thompson v. Thompson · Darragh v. Barmore · Kilgore v. North West Texas Baptist Educational Society
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In construing a will it must be ascertained from the general context of the will whether the testator used the words ‘money’ or ‘cash’ in a restricted or in a more comprehensive sense * * °. In its more comprehensive sense ‘money’ means wealth, the representative of commodities of all kinds. It is accordingly often popularly used as equivalent to ‘property’ and when the intention of the testator so to use it is manifest, it may include all kinds of property, real and personal.” ( 260 S.W.2d 685 , 688.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Zinn v. McGinnis
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.