Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 55 Okla. 266 - Fouts v. Nance

Fouts v. Nance’s Empirical Analysis

1916

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
4
states following
July 1999
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently July 1999 · most notably Weitz v. Moulden (1925), Stewart v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. (1942)

3 federal appellate · 27 state decisions

90191619201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Ridden v. . Thrall · In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of Bolin · Harris Banking Co. v. Miller · Lord v. New York Life Insurance Co. · Grey v. . Grey

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

  1. ““When it is remembered that these gifts come into question only after death has closed the lips of the donor; that there is no legal limit to the amount which may be disposed of by means of them, * * * the dangerous character of the rule becomes conspicuous.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““We concede that, while the evidence of a gift should be clear and convincing, yet if there is any evidence reasonably tending to prove the fact of a gift in the instant case, then the court was justified in submitting the question to the jury.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““It is the general rule in every jurisdiction that after the death of the donor, in order to establish a gift inter vivos, the evidence must be clear, Explicit, and convincing in support of every element needed to constitute a valid gift.””
    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.