Newman v. Dore’s Empirical Analysis
1937
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 146 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 163 later decisions — most recently March 2009 · most notably 73 Ill. 2d 342 - Johnson v. La Grange State Bank (1978), Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. The Chase Manhattan Bank, Successor of the Chase National Bank of the City of New York, Trustee and Alleged Transferee of Marie Elizabeth Moran, the Chase Manhattan Bank, Sucessor of the Chase National Bank of the City of New York, Trustee and Alleged Transferee of Marie Elizabeth Moran v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1958)
13 federal appellate · 146 state decisions — followed in 25 states
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 Bullen v. State of Wisconsin · Superior Oil Co v. State of Mississippi Knox · Jenkins v. Moyse · Robb v. . Washington Jefferson College · Rabbitt v. Gaither
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 163 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In this case the decedent, as we have said, retained not only the income for life and power to revoke the trust, but also the right to control the trustees. We need not now determine whether such a trust is, for any purpose, a valid present trust. It has been said that, ‘where the settlor transfers property in trust and reserves not only * * * a power to revoke and modify the trust but also such power to control the trustee as to the details of the administration of the trust that the trustee is the agent of the settlor, the disposition so far as it is intended to take effect after his death is testamentary. * *.’ American Law Institute, Restatement of the Law of Trust, § 57, subd. 2. We do not now consider whether the rule so stated is in accord with the law of this state or whether in this case the reserved power of control is so great that the trustee is in fact ‘the agent of the settlor.” We assume, without deciding, that except for the provisions of section 18 of the Decedent Estate Law the trust would be valid. * * * Perhaps ‘from the technical point of view such a conveyance does not quite take back all that it gives, but practically it does.’ That is enough to render it an unlawful invasion of the expectant interest of the wife. Leonard v. Leonard, supra. * * * “Judged by the substance, not by the form, the testator’s conveyance is illusory, intended only as a mask for the effective retention by the settlor of the property which in form he had conveyed. “In this case”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Land v. Marshall · Limpp v. Dodge“Since the law gives the wife only an expectant interest in the property of her husband which becomes part of his estate, and since the law does not restrict transfers of property by the husband during his life, it would seem that the only sound test of the validity of a challenged transfer is whether it is real or illusory.... The test has been formulated in different ways, but in most jurisdictions the test applied is essentially the test of whether the husband has in good faith divested himself of ownership of his property or has made an illusory transfer.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“in such manner only as the settlor shall from time to time direct in writing.”
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.