Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 62 ARK 313 - Barnett v. Meacham

Barnett v. Meacham’s Empirical Analysis

1896

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
4
states following
October 1978
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently October 1978

9 state decisions

30189619001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Wallace v. Hall's Heirs · Oakley v. Oakley · Padgett v. Norman

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

  1. ““It has been recently decided in this court that the conveyance by a widow of her right of dower in the lands of her deceased husband, before the assignment of her dower, confers upon the alienee no right which he • can enforce at law, but that he may, in equity, have her dower set aside and assigned to him. A widow, before the assignment of her dower, may occupy and hold the mansion house and farm attached free of rent till her dower is assigned. But, if she abandons the possession, the heir may enter and occupy the premises, subject to her right to have dower assigned. ‘She may occupy and cultivate the land herself, or allow another to do it for her.’ She need not remain on it in person, ‘for it may be she could only derive a support from the premises by renting them.’ McReynolds v. Counts, 9 Grat. (Va.) 242; Oakley v. Oakley, 30 Ala. 131 ; Padgett v. Norman, 44 Ark. 490 . ‘But this (quarantine) right to occupy the premises, or to receive the profits for her maintenance, is so far personal to the widow that it cannot be transferred to another; and if, before her dower is assigned, she makes a conveyance of her interest, the heir may recover in ejectment.against the alienee.’ 2 Scribner, Dower, p. 64; Wallace v. Hall, 19 Ala. 367 ; Wallis v. Doe, 2 Smedes & M. (Miss.) 220. When Mrs. Ward transferred her interest to Meacham, and abandoned the premises, a right of action in ejectment against Meacham accrued to the appellant.””
    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.