Curry v. Cotton’s Empirical Analysis
1934
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 63 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably 13 Ill. 2d 443 - Bonczkowski v. Kucharski (1958), 34 Ill. 2d 295 - Helms v. Darmstatter (1966)
5 federal appellate · 63 state decisions — followed in 12 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.
Relationships
Relies on 9 E.H. Smith 555 - Edson v. . Parsons · Frazier v. Patterson · Rastetter v. . Hoenninger · Carmichael v. Carmichael · Ohio Oil Co. v. Daughetee
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The terms `joint wills' and `mutual wills' are sometimes inaptly used interchangeably. A joint will is a written instrument executed and published by two or more persons disposing of the property, or some part of the property, owned jointly or in common by them or in severalty by them. On the death of the testator first dying it is subject to record and probate as his will, and on the death of the surviving testator it is subject to probate as his will. A joint will may or may not be mutual or reciprocal. Mutual or reciprocal wills are the separate instruments of two or more persons, the terms of such wills being reciprocal and by which each testator makes testamentary disposition in favor of the other. (30 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 556.) A will that is both joint and reciprocal is an instrument executed jointly by two or more persons with reciprocal provisions and shows on its face that the bequests are made one in consideration of the other. ( Frazier v. Patterson, 243 Ill. 80 , 28 R.C.L. 167.)"”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Joint and mutual or reciprocal wills, especially when executed by husbands and wives usually are based upon mutual trust and confidence, but that fact alone neither makes the instrument a contract, nor destroys its ambulatory character. ’ ’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.