Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 45 ARK 41 - Reid v. Hart

Reid v. Hart’s Empirical Analysis

1885

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
March 1985
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1985

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

2018851890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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

  1. “There had, however, been provisions made for the sale of lands, on the application of administrators and executors, for the payment of debts. They were adopted early in our state history, being found in the Revised Code (Sec. 147) and remained in- force until the adoption of the Civil Code of 1868. They required that the application for such an order should be made to the Probate Court of the county in which the lands are situate. The Act of December 23, 1846, enlarged the scope of purposes for which such sales might be made, and associated ‘ guardians ’ with personal representatives (ubi supra) but made no change as to the tribunal. It may fairly be inferred that, by this association, the Legislature contemplated that guardians should conform to the same rule, and make their applications for the sale of lands in the county where they lay. . . . This is law to this, day, and has been brought forward into Mansfield’s Digest, Sec. 3509. This displays a system by which wé endeavor to supply the omission in the act of 1846, which fails to designate the probate court meant, by reasoning from the organic unity of the whole system.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “When it shall appear that it would be for the benefit of a ward that his real estate, or any part thereof, be sold or leased and the proceeds put on interest, or invested in productive stocks, or in other real estate, his guardian or curator may sell or lease the same accordingly upon obtaining an order for such sale or lease from the court of probate of the county in which such real estate or the greater part thereof shall be situate.”
    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.