Hale v. Bradley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The meaning of this statute is clear, plain and unambiguous. When a testator calls upon persons to witness his will, “ ‘the testator shall signify to the attesting witnesses that the instrument in his will’.” Surely it cannot be contended that this provision of the statute is doubtful of meaning. It simply means that the testator must state to the witnesses in substance that the paper writing is his will and that he wants them to sign it as witnesses. By the uncontradicted evidence before us that essential requisite of the execution of a valid will is lacking. The testatrix did not signify to the attesting witnesses that the instrument was the will of testatrix.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cooper v. Austin

2. “Under our statute it is not essential that an express request be made by the testator to the attesting witnesses that they witness his will. The statute sets out that he shall signify to them that the instrument is his will, and this may be implied from his acts and conduct and from the facts and attending circumstances.... [[Image here]] ... In this State evidence of due execution of a will is not confined to the attesting witnesses but may be proved by other competent evidence including the testimony of persons who were not subscribing witnesses but were present at the execution of the will.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jackson v. Patton