Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 72 KAN 182 - Fincke v. Bundrick

Fincke v. Bundrick’s Empirical Analysis

1905

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
3
states following
February 1926
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently February 1926

9 state decisions

40190519101920decided

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 Antoine Michoud v. Peronne Bernardine Girod · Daniel Green's Administratrix v. Fletcher Creighton · Gafford v. Dickinson · McAdow v. Boten · Halsted v. Hyman

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

  1. ““Since it was not possible for the plaintiff to obtain relief in the probate court, administration having been closed and the executor finally-discharged, the district court had jurisdiction to entertain her suit. (Gafford, Guardian, v. Dickson, Adm’r, 37 Kan. 287, 15 Pac. 175 ; McAdow v. Boten, 67 Kan. 136, 72 Pac. 529 .)” (p. 189.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.