61 Md. App. 314 - Wall v. Heller’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently January 2007
18 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 Baltimore Transit Co. v. Mezzanotti · Sellers v. Qualls · Gesell v. Baugher · Arbogast, Exec. v. MacMillan · INGALLS, OF ESTATE OF INGALLS v. Trustees of Mt. Oak Methodist Church
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whether a testator had sufficient mental capacity is determined by a consideration of his external acts and appearances. It must appear that at the time of making the will, he had a full understanding of the nature of the business in which he was engaged; a recollection of the property of which he intended to dispose and the persons to whom he meant to give it, and the relative claims of the different persons who were or should have been the objects of his bounty.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““(a) Determination of an issue of fact.—In a controversy in the court, an issue of fact may be determined by the court. "(b) Transfer of determination to law court.—At the request of an interested person made within the time determined by the court, the issue of fact may be determined by a court of law. When the request is made before the court has determined the issue of fact, the court shall transmit the issue to a court of law.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Merling v. Merling“It must appear that at the time of making the will, [the testator] had a full understanding of the nature of the business in which he was engaged; a recollection of the property which he intended to dispose and the persons to whom he meant to give it, and the relative claims of the different persons who were or should have been the objects of his bounty.”
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.