Curry v. Curry’s Empirical Analysis
1914
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently July 1976
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 Vanderzee v. Slingerland · Mulvane v. Rude · Britton v. Thornton · Ide v. Ide · Howard v. Carusi
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The intent of the testator is recognized by all the authorities as being the polar star to which the courts must always look in construing a will. Laisure v. Richards (1914), 56 Ind. App. 301 , 103 N. E. 679 ; Pate v. Bushong (1903), 161 Ind. 533, 537 , 69 N. E. 291 , 100 Am. St. 287, 63 L.R.A. 593 ; Fenstermaker v. Holman, supra; Moore v. Gary (1897), 149 Ind. 51, 57 , 48 N. E. 630 ; Calvin v. Springer (1902), 28 Ind. App. 443, 446 , 63 N. E. 40 ; Smith v. Meiser, supra. In ascertaining this intent, the court should consider the will in its entirety and if possible give effect to every item and word thereof.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““. . . ‘where an estate is given to a person generally, or indefinitely, with a power of disposition, it carries a fee; and the only exception to the rule is, where the testator gives to the first taker an estate for life only, by certain and express words, apd annexes to it a power of disposal. In that particular and special case, the devisee for life will not take an estate in fee, notwithstanding the distinct and naked gift of a power of disposition of the reversion.’ ””
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.