Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 332 Mo. 417 - Davis v. Johnson

Davis v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

1933

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
January 2008
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently January 2008 · most notably State Ex Rel. Lipic v. Flynn (1948), In Re Petersen's Estate (1956)

2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

15019331940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Tygard v. Falor · State ex rel. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Ellison · Trautmann v. Trautmann · Estate of Huffman v. Huffman · Bank of Willow Springs v. Lillibridge

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

  1. ““It is manifest that the issues do not describe any specific property or money of which delivery in specie is sought; so that, for the moment, the provision of the statute which relates to delivery and the commitment of a defendant for his refusal to deliver upon his conviction, may be laid out of view. Let it, then, be assumed that upon a trial it be found that the original defendants received certain moneys and other personal property belonging to the deceased testator, and had withheld and converted the same in an amount and value shown. Is there any reason why the court could not, as required by the statute, ‘render judgment according to the finding1? We know of none, and none has been pointed out.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The procedure authorized by those statutes `is a summary and quick method of bringing property into the estate * * *' * * * devised not merely to discover assets, but also to expedite the administration of estates by affording a new and special remedy for collecting assets.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “save only where there may be sufficient reason disclosed in exceptional cases why the matter, in whole or in part, might not be tried in the probate court.”
    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.