Brook v. Chappell’s Empirical Analysis
1874
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently March 1981 · most notably Ransdel v. Moore (1899), Ludington v. Patton (1901)
50 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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.
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Undoubtedly every part of a will must be in writing, and a naked parol declaration of trust, in respect of land devised, is void. The trust insisted on here, however, owes its validity, not to the will or the declaration of the testator, but to the fraud of the devisee. It belongs to a class in which the trust arises ex maleficio, and in which equity turns the fraudulent procurer of the legal title into a trustee, to get at him; and there is nothing in reason or authority to forbid the raising of such a trust from the surreptitious procurement of a devise.” (Page 415.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gemmel v. Fletcher““The jurisdiction here conferred is coextensive with that possessed by any court of equity or of law in a case of this description, which clearly relates to the settlement and distribution of the estate of the testator. . . . The plenary powers of the court of probate in all matters within its jurisdiction, have often been recognized by this court; and we do not know that they are or will be seriously questioned by any one.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““We do not suppose the county court, sitting in probate, is limited to granting or refusing the precise relief' asked on such application, but are of opinion that, acting within its jurisdiction, it may, especially where the parties opposed in interest are present or are represented, grant any relief consistent with the facts proved or admitted and which the justice of the case demands.””
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.