Keller v. Keller’s Empirical Analysis
1936
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 district · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently May 1989 · most notably Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. Robertson (1949), 75 Ill. App. 3d 195 - Huckaby v. Huckaby (1979)
10 federal appellate · 2 district · 26 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 Nichols Assignee v. Eaton et al. · Moorehead's Estate · Kelley v. Kelley · Broadway National Bank v. Adams · Steib v. Whitehead
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘ ' §157. Particular Classes of Claimants. Although a trust is a spendthrift trust or a trust for support, the interest of the beneficiary can be reached in satisfaction of an enforceable claim against the beneficiary, “ (a) by the wife or child of the beneficiary for support, or by the wife for alimony; * * ■*.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““‘Except where the trust was a spendthrift trust of the strictest sort, requiring the income to be paid to the beneficiary in person, and no one else (as in Board of Charities & Correction v. Lockard (1901) 198 Pa. 572 , 82 Am. St. Rep. 817 , 48 Atl. 496 ), the courts have uniformly construed provisions for the protection of the beneficiary from the claims of creditors or the consequences of his own improvidence, as not preventing the income of the trust from being subjected to the support of the beneficiary’s wife and minor children. [Citations.].”’ (Emphasis added.) Keller v. Keller, 284 Ill.App. 198, 205 .)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““We hold that because the will creating this trust fund does not expressly disclose an intention to the contrary, because the claim for support of children is one which transcends any contractual obligation, ’ and because of the recognition in our law of the unity of the family, the court did not err in subjecting the income from this trust fund to the support of the minor children of the beneficiary. * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Roorda v. Roorda
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.