Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 288 Ga. 711 - McDaniel v. McDaniel

McDaniel v. McDaniel’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
November 2016
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Cook v. Huff · Johnson v. State · Bailey v. Edmundson · Bowman v. Bowman · Lillard v. Owens

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

  1. “Undue influence may take many forms and may operate through diverse channels. There is no requirement that the undue influence be directly attributable to the propounder or to a single beneficiary. Although evidence which merely shows an opportunity to influence is not itself sufficient, a caveat based upon the ground of undue influence may be supported by a wide range of evidence, as such influence can seldom be shown except by circumstantial evidence.”
    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.