Burch v. Sutton’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The doctrine of equitable election is in derogation of the property right of the true owner. Hence, the intention to put a beneficiary to an election must appear plainly from the terms of the will. Lamb v. Lamb, 226 N.C. 662 , 40 S.E. 2d 29 ; Bank v. Misenheimer, 211 N.C. 519 , 191 S.E. 14 ; Rich v. Morisey, 149 N.C. 37 , 62 S.E. 762 ; Walston v. College, 258 N.C. 130 , 128 S.E. 2d 134 . ‘An election is required only when the will confronts a beneficiary with a choice between two benefits which are inconsistent with each other.’ Honeycutt v. Bank, 242 N.C. 734 , 89 S.E. 2d 598 . An election is required only if the will discloses it was the testator’s manifest purpose to put the beneficiary to an election. Bank v. Barbee, 260 N.C. 106, 110 , 131 S.E. 2d 666 . “In Lamb v. Lamb, supra, in accordance with prior decisions, this Court said: ‘(I)f, upon a fair and reasonable construction of the will, the testator, in a purported disposal of the beneficiary’s property, has'mistaken it to be his own, the law will not imply the necessity of election.’ This statement is quoted with approval in Bank v. Barbee, supra, in which pertinent prior decisions are cited.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Breece v. Breece · Mansour v. Rabil