Rockett Will’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

37 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In this Commonwealth the line of demarcation between matters of probate and of distribution or construction is distinct and definite. In this connection it was said by this Court, in Carson’s Estate, 241 Pa. 117, 121 , 88 A. 311 : ‘The probate of a will without regard to its provisions is one thing; distribution of the estate of the testator in accordance with its terms is another. The former is for the register; the latter is none of his concern.’ ””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re the Estate of Morrow · In re the Estate of Morrow

2. ““It is clear that the issue here, i.e., whether or not clause (a) formed a part of testator’s will, is one of probate, rather than of construction or distribution. . . . ‘Accordingly, nothing is better settled in England than that the ordinary or ecclesiastical court has exclusive jurisdiction of the question, whether any particular clause is really a part of the will of the testator. ... We may assume that where the contest is, whether a particular clause really forms a part of the will of the testator . . . it is in the power of the register to grant probate of the rest of the paper without such clause as forming in truth no part of the will. . . .’ “Although it appears from the affidavit of the attesting witnesses that the marginal notations apparently were not on the will at the time of its execution, the decree of probate, nevertheless, fails to state whether or not they are part of the will with which we are here concerned. The silence of the decree in this connection makes it capable of a double interpretation, either that the clause was or was not revoked, and thus a proper distribution could not be made at the audit. . . . Therefore, in the instant case, in view of the Register’s failure to determine whether all or merely a part of the instrument offered for probate was in fact the will of testator, it is obvious that the court below had no alternative but to declare the decree of probate void and refuse to audit the account until an intelligible and unequivocal decr”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 3 Pa. D. & C.2d 581 - Bechtel Estate

3. ““We agree with the court en banc ‘that the learned Auditing Judge was restricted at the audit of the executor’s account to the application of the testator’s wishes as expressed in the will, not as found by the Auditing Judge, but as determined by the Register. It was his function to construe the instrument presented to him with the Register’s specific finding and without any authority in him as the Auditing Judge to take any testimony or to deliberate the matter further than what appears on the face of the instrument itself and in the Register’s record.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mayor Estate