54 Wis. 2d 47 - State v. Hartman’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently April 2015
14 state decisions
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 48 Wis. 2d 364 - State v. Eisenberg · 48 Wis. 2d 32 - Alexopoulos v. Dakouras · Melms v. Pabst Brewing Co. · 30 Wis. 2d 116 - Robert Hill Foundation v. Learman · Will of Hoya
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.
““[T]he personal representative is a fiduciary and is under a duty to administer the estate ‘with as little sacrifice of value as is reasonable under the circumstances.’ ORS 114.265. As such a fiduciary, the personal representative has a duty, if a sale is in the best interests of the estate, to sell the estate assets for the best price that can reasonably be obtained in the market at that time. [Citations omitted.]””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Chestnut v. Steward“An executor's trust is not discharged by selling at the appraised price unless there is evidence to show that was the best price that could be obtained in the exercise of reasonable diligence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Piette v. Horn“interested in the purchase of estate property without both "written consent of the parties concerned . . . and approval of the court after notice and hearing[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Piette v. Horn
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.