O'NEILL v. Cox’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently May 2020
2 federal appellate · 6 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 Spaniard v. Tantom · In Re Adams' Estate · Dilks v. Carson · Clements v. Moore
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"When any testator omits to provide in his will for any of his children, or for the issue of any deceased child unless it appears that such omission was intentional, such child, or the issue of such child, must have the same share in the estate of the testator, as if he had died intestate, and succeeds thereto as provided for in preceding section." (Emphasis added)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“I have no children and have never had any children”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“I cannot think of any more that the man could possibly have done to see to it that his son, under any circumstances, would get any benefit from his estate .... Taking the will as a whole, it must be apparent that he had that intention.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Corr v. Corr
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.