Martin v. McMullan’s Empirical Analysis
1939
Citation profile
38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently May 1982 · most notably 30 Cal. 2d 274 - Estate of Wunderle (1947), 31 Cal. 2d 563 - Estate of Smith (1948)
38 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 Lockbihler v. Young · In Re Estate of Plumel · Brown v. . Clark · In re Estate of Skerrett · In re Estate of Soher
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The governing principle is, therefore, the intention of the testator. It does not necessarily follow from the fact of the new will that full and entire revocation was intended. The purpose may have been to make supplemental provisions, consistent with the former will in whole or in part, to dispose of other property, or to amend and alter the prior dispositions only. Hence a complete revocation by implication will not follow unless the general tenor of the later will shows clearly that the testator so intended, or the two instruments are so plainly inconsistent as to be incapable of standing together.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Smith v. Davison““A prior will is not revoked by a subsequent will, unless the latter contains an express revocation, or provisions wholly inconsistent with the terms of the prior will. In other cases the prior will remains effectual so far as consistent with the provisions of the subsequent will; . . . ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Smith v. Davison“The will contains dispositive clauses and also appoints executors, but it is not our duty at this time to interpret the will and we are not attempting to do so. It is our duty only to determine of what the will consists.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Estate of Philippi
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.