Harrison v. Lamar’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 state decisions

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

1. ““There are - no grounds for drawing a distinction between real and personal property in the construction of these acts. If there were any, the ‘estate’ must be considered as more aptly referring to real property. But under our system of administration, which regards the whole mass of property, real and personal, as assets for some purposes, in the hands of the administrator the word estate has acquired a wider application, in a popular sense, and in this sense, doubtless the Legislature meant to use it. It means the mass of property left by decedent, and if that in the aggregate, should be less, than $300 in value, the intention of the acts, taken together, is. to give it to the widow, if living, or, if there be no widow, to minor children.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Perryman v. Woodward

2. ““It is a proceeding in rem, "fixing the status of the property as to ownership,' and declaring to all the world the course of devolution which, under the circumstances, the law-gave to the property of the deceased. It did not vest the right so much as declare it, and it was not necessary that it should specify the personal property, or describe the lands by metes, bounds, or numbers. It carried the whole property without reserve, leaving nothing to be determined with regard to its identity, but the fact that it was part of the estate left by decedent.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Perryman v. Woodward

3. ““The statute does not prescribe any notice to be given to heirs or distributees. As to these small estates, they have no prima facie rights; the amount of the estate being, admitted. They are taken out of the course of devolution prescribed to larger ones, and, there being no right to be divested out of them, there is no other reason for making them parties than that they should have the right to question the amount of the estate.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Perryman v. Woodward