Mansfield v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis
1910
Citation profile
8 district · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently October 2008 · most notably Gardine v. Cottey (1950), Banfield v. Schulderman (1930)
8 district · 50 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 Morrill v. Morrill · Heirs of Clark v. Ellis · Hubbard v. Hubbard · Miller v. Miller · Creyts v. Creyts
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It undoubtedly was used inadvertently instead of ‘exemption,’ and the effect of the law without that clause is that it will descend to the heirs if not devised or conveyed, for the reason that there is no inhibition against any disposition of the homestead that the owner may see fit to make. Its only effect is to make it exempt from execution if duly claimed by either spouse, against every character of execution except one issued upon foreclosure of a mortgage in which the husband and wife joined. Therefore it is subject, to devise or conveyance by the owner, or descends to the heirs under the statute.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘ ‘ This law is only a statute of exemption, and contains no other elements. It does not create a homestead in which the wife or children have any right or title other than the right of owner thereof, or the wife, husband, agent, or attorney of such owner, to claim it exempt from attachment, levy, or sale on execution, and this right to claim such exemption continues after the death of the owner.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * if the amount were a definite sum named in the decree, it would constitute a lien from the time it is docketed, under the terms of section 205, B. & C. Comp., which, provides that, from the date of docketing a judgment as in this chapter provided, such judgment shall be a lien upon all the real property of the defendant within the county, etc. ’ ’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mason v. Mason
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.