Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 267 F.2d 133 - Clifton F. Weidlich v. Arthur M. Comley

Clifton F. Weidlich v. Arthur M. Comley’s Empirical Analysis

267 F.2d 133 · 1959

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
5
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently June 2018

6 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

601959196019701980199020002010decided

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 Jessup v. . Smith · Brown v. Eggleston · Gordon v. Guernsey · In Re the Accounting of Ordway

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

  1. “"Coming then to the merits of the dispute, the plaintiff's first complaint is the allowance to the defendant out of the trust assets of his expenses in defending himself in the action. The argument is that these expenses were incurred in the defendant's individual interest, and may not be charged against the trust. That completely misses the true situation: a trustee was appointed to administer the assets; the settlor selected him to do so, and whatever interferes with his discharge of his duty pro tanto defeats the settlor's purpose. When the trustee's administration of the assets is unjustifiedly assailed it is a part of his duty to defend himself, for in so doing he is realizing the settlor's purpose. To compel him to bear the expense of an unsuccessful attack would be to diminish the compensation to which he is entitled and which was a part of the inducement to his acceptance of the burden of his duties. This has been uniformly the ruling, so far as we have found. Jessup v. Smith, 223 N.Y. 203, 207 , 119 N.E. 403 ; Matter of Bishop's Will, 277 App.Div. 108 , 98 N.Y.S.2d 69 ; 301 N.Y. 498 , 95 N.E.2d 817 ; Gordon v. Guernsey, 316 Mass. 106 , 55 N.E.2d 27 ; Scott on Trusts, § 188.4."”
    7 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.