Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 84 ALA 53 - Snider v. Burks

Snider v. Burks’s Empirical Analysis

1887

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
5
states following
May 1993
most recently cited

31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently May 1993 · most notably Barnewall v. Murrell (1895), 380 So. 2d 792 - Stiles v. Brown (1980)

31 state decisions

70188718901900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Morton & Bliss v. New Orleans & Selma Railway Co. · Kumpe v. Coons · Moore v. Spier · Foote v. Cobb · Cox v. Davis

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

  1. “The general rule is that where the will of a testator is proved to have been in the testator's possession, and can not afterwards be found, the prima facie presumption is that it was destroyed by the testator before his death animo revocandi. But this presumption may be rebutted by proper legal evidence. [Citation omitted.] But if the instrument is shown to have been out of his possession, the party asserting the fact of revocation "must show that it came again into his custody, or was actually destroyed by his direction." [Citation omitted.] Where the will is executed in duplicate, as in this case, a somewhat different rule obtains. If, in such case, the testator destroys one of the duplicates, and this is the only one in his possession, and intent *Page 796 to revoke is to be presumed. . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “must show that it came again into his custody, or was actually destroyed by his direction.”
    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.