Young v. . Shulenberg’s Empirical Analysis
1901
Citation profile
37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently February 1969 · most notably In Re the Estate of Findlay (1930), Aalholm v. . People (1914)
37 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedYoung v. Shulenberg
Relationships
Relies on Deery v. Cray · Eisenlord v. . Clum · Fulkerson v. Holmes · O'Gara v. . Eisenlohr · Jackson ex dem. Ross v. Cooley
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Pedigree is the history of family descent, which is transmitted from one generation to another by both oral and written declarations, and unless proved by hearsay evidence it cannot, in most instances, be proved at all. Hence, declarations of deceased members of a family, made ante litem motam, are received to prove family relationship, including marriages, births, and deaths, and the facts necessarily resulting from those events. . . . Before the declarations can be received, however, as evidence of pedigree, it must appear that the person making them was a member of the family and that he is dead, incompetent, or beyond the jurisdiction of the court.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Miller
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.