Uihlein v. Uihlein’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 federal appellate · 42 state decisions

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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Counsel for the widow . . . contend, that because the testator included in his will a direction that all estate and inheritance taxes would be paid from the residue of his estate, this amounted to a direct provision by the testator that the burden of the federal estate tax should fall upon the remaindermen taking the residue, and not upon the widow, who has elected to take under the law “ . . . by following the construction contended for by counsel for the widow, the widow would stand to benefit by the clause of the will which provided for the payment of federal estate taxes out of the residue. If the widow had not renounced the will by her election she would have taken under the residuary clause after deduction of the federal estate tax, and she ought not to be placed in a more advantageous position, in so far as the impact of such tax is concerned, by such election.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 336 F. Supp. 464 - Greene v. United States

2. “(p. 374) “This court in Will of Kootz . . . rejected the theory that our court should invoke its equity powers to achieve an apportionment of federal estate taxes which would prevent inequities.” (p. 376) “We deem that it would be unwarranted judicial legislation for this court to attempt to apportion the impact of the federal estate tax .... The legislature has the power to enact an apportionment of federal estate-tax statute providing for a different method of bearing the impact of federal estate taxes if it should determine the same desirable. However, three general sessions of the legislature have been held since congress amended the federal estate-tax statute so as to provide for the marital deduction, and to date our legislature has not seen fit to adopt such apportionment statute.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 16 Wis. 2d 489 - McGillivray v. Langill

3. ““ ‘Where the enjoyment of possession by the remain-derman is postponed until after the determination of the particular estate and for no other purpose, and such tenant elects to take against the will, the remainderman enters into enjoyment at once. This principle is called acceleration of the remainders. Renunciation by the particular tenant is said to be equivalent to his death with reference to the remainder’s taking effect in possession.’ ” 1”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 39 Wis. 2d 155 - Fleming v. Bank of Madison