Campbell v. Jordan’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently March 1997 · most notably Snyder v. Freeman (1980), Young Women's Christian Ass'n of Asheville v. Morgan (1972)
7 federal appellate · 15 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 Woodard v. Mordecai · Murray · State v. Faison · Wachovia Bank & Trust Company v. Taliaferro · Kemp v. Paterson
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We think it abundantly clear that testator did not intend to give his trustee the unbridled discretion to divide his estate in contravention of his testamentary plan or to invade the corpus in behalf of any beneficiary except in case of necessity or circumstances clearly denoting that such invasion was best for the beneficiary’s personal welfare. The beneficiary’s necessity or welfare does not include the personal satisfaction she might derive from owning the property in fee and being able to devise it to persons of her choice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“necessary or best for the welfare of the [beneficiaries], and consistent with the welfare of [the testator's] family and estate....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The term 'discretion' has been defined as deliberate judgment, -- the discernment of what is right and proper. It implies soundness of judgment -- judgment directed by circumspection. "* * * "'If a trust is created for beneficiaries in succession, the Trustee is under a duty to the successive beneficiaries to act with due regard to their respective interests.' Restatement of Law of Trusts, section 232 , and note b thereunder; also section 183.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.