Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 361 P2D 498 - Hildebrand v. Harrison

Hildebrand v. Harrison’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
4
states following
December 2013
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently December 2013

11 state decisions

50196119701980199020002010decided

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 Toone v. Walker · Whitson v. Bell · Apple v. American National Bank · Jones v. Novotny · Hildebrand v. Harrison

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

  1. ““In Apple v. American Nat. Bank of Ardmore, 104 Okl. 69 , 231 P. 79, 82 , we said in the second paragraph of the syllabus that ‘If a transfer is made by a debtor in anticipation of a suit against him, or after a suit has begun, and while it is pending against him, this is a badge of fraud, and especially if it' leaves the debtor without any estate, or greatly reduces his property.’ As heretofore pointed out, the Ravenscraft-Hildebrand conveyance was made after the Huston suit had been filed. “We had this to say in the third and fourth paragraphs of the syllabus to Toone v. Walker et al., 115 Okl. 289 , 243 P. 147 : “Badges of fraud” are suspicious circumstances that overhang a transaction, or appear on the face of the papers. The possible indicia of fraud are so numerous that no court could pretend to anticipate and catalog them. A single one may stamp the transaction as fraudulent, and, when several are found in combination, strong and clear evidence on the part of the upholder of the transaction will be required to repel the conclusion of fraud.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““§ 5. Transfers with intent to defraud Every transfer of property or charge thereon made, every obligation incurred, and every judicial proceeding taken, with intent to delay or defraud any creditor or other person of his demands is void against all creditors of the debtor, and their successors in interest, and against any persons upon whom the estate of the debtor devolves in trust for the benefit of others than the debtor.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““ ‘If a transfer is made by a debtor in anticipation of a suit against him, or after a suit has begun, and while it is pending against him, this is a badge of fraud, and especially if it leaves the debtor without any estate, or greatly reduces his property.’ ” (Emphasis supplied.)”
    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.