Ford v. Yost’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently August 2013 · most notably Fiduciary Trust Co. v. Mishou (1947), Hull v. Rolfsrud (1954)
25 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 In re Estate of Walkerly · Johnson v. Preston · Friday's Estate · Chenoweth v. Bullitt · Tyler v. Fidelity & Columbia Trust Co.
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘As a general rule of the doctrine, one cannot be estopped by reason of accepting that which he is legally enti- tied to receive in any event; hence, as stated in 19 Am.Jur., Estoppel, Sec. 65 [p. 690, 692], "estoppel against attacking or disputing a contract or transaction is not ordinarily created by the acceptance of a benefit purporting to be derived therefrom if in fact the party is entitled thereto regardless of whether the contract or transaction is sustained or overthrown.” “ ‘In this state the doctrine of estop-pel by acquiescence or by the acceptance of benefits under a will has not been freely applied. * * * ’ “In view of the foregoing I am of the opinion the plaintiff is entitled to recover the sum herein sought.””
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.