Browne v. Browne’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We hold that the county court in the exercise of its probate jurisdiction does have the power and authority to adjudicate conflicting claims of ownership and right of possession to personal property which is claimed both by the representative of a decedent’s estate and by third parties who claim title, not through the decedent and his representative, but from another source. T.C.A. § 16-709(5), 16-711; T.C.A. §§ 30-509— 30-518; 33 C.J.S. Executors and Administrators § 176, Property Claims by Third Persons, p. 1147. [[Image here]] This Court has said that all doubts as to the jurisdiction of matters involving administration of an estate should be resolved in favor of the county court. Fox v. Commerce Union Bank, 186 Tenn. 181 , 209 S.W.2d 1 (1948). This Court has approved a statement by the Court of Appeals which declared that the statutes above cited are designed to afford a simple and informal method of filing and determining claims against decedent’s estates and, to that end, are to be liberally construed. In Re Myers’ Estate, 55 Tenn.App. 195 , 397 S.W.2d 831 (1965). 547 S.W.2d at 240 -241”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bishop v. Young

2. ““The county or the probate court . shall hear and determine all issues arising upon all such exceptions. . . . and from [the judgment] an appeal may be perfected within thirty (30) days from the date of entry of the judgment, to the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, as the case may be.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ezell v. Buhler

3. “Admittedly, the language of this Court in Dick v. Dick, 223 Tenn. 228 , 443 S.W.2d 472 (1969), may lend some support to the contrary conclusion reached by the Court of appeals, although the strict holding in that case does not.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bishop v. Young