Mathews v. Mathews’s Empirical Analysis
1920
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently November 1971
5 federal appellate · 4 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 Denver & Rio Grande Railroad v. Sullivan · Tourtelotte v. Brown
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.
““The object of plaintiff in his suit was to set aside duly and formally executed instruments conveying title to real estate, and to also nullify other transactions concerning the purchase, sale and transfer of personal property, on the ground of fraud. The burden of proof to show the alleged-- fraud was of course upon him; to establish such fact, so as to have the deeds and sale transfers set aside and a trust declared, the evidence must be of greater strength and probative force than in ordinary civil cases; indeed, the evidence to warrant such relief under such circumstances must be direct, strong and highly convincing. Tourtelotte v. Brown, 4 Colo. App. 377 , 36 Pac. 73 . It must be clear, precise and indubitable. D. & R. G. R. R. Co. v. Sullivan, 21 Colo. 302 , 41 Pac. 501 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Robbins v. Nelsen
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.