611 So. 2d 1051 - Bolan v. Bolan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'mind and memory sufficient to recall and remember the property she was about to bequeath, and the objects of her bounty, and the disposition which she wished to make — to know and understand the nature and consequences of the business to be performed, and to discern the simple and obvious relation of its elements to each other.'”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte Helms · 724 So. 2d 521 - Hodges v. Genzone

2. ““There was evidence that [another daughter, one of the contestants,] and [the testator] were both strong-willed people and simply did not get along, notwithstanding [the contestant daughter’s] good intentions in trying to persuade [the testator] to take medicine, see a doctor, and so forth. There was also substantial testimony, however, that the contestants enjoyed a good relationship with [the testator] up until the very end of his life. In light of this testimony, and because whether a beneficiary is ‘favored’ depends on the particular facts of the case, Cook v. Morton, [ 241 Ala. 188 , 1 So.2d 890 (1941) ], the trial court did not err in submitting to the jury the question of whether [the proponent daughter] was a ‘favored beneficiary’ under the controlling Cook definition.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Morrow v. Helms

3. “"`"Evidence is competent to prove conduct and language at various times and places indicating an unhealthy mental condition, and the more extensive the view the safer is the determination reached." "`Thus, evidence offered as to the mental and physical condition of the testator], either before or immediately after execution of the will, is admissible since it tends to indicate [his] condition when the will was signed. Likewise, testimony regarding the testat[or's] "conversations, deportment, acts, and appearance" has been found to be competent on the issue of testamentary capacity.'"”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 960 So. 2d 620 - Pirtle v. Tucker