Ham v. . Van Orden’s Empirical Analysis
1881
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1941 · most notably Brown v. Fletcher (1915), Senior v. Braden (1935)
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 22 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 Moore v. Littel · M'Crea v. Purmort · McKinster v. . Babcock · Woodgate v. . Fleet
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In either ease, she [the plaintiff] acquired an interest although the right to possession was postponed to a future period and depended upon the contingency of the death of Wessel without children. This did not prevent the creation of the estate, but rendered it liable to be defeated. It was an estate in expectancy, however, and could not be destroyed by any alienation or other act of Wessel or his trustee, and upon his death without children would become absolute in the plaintiff. It was therefore alienable by her to the same extent as if in possession, and whether it be deemed vested or contingent. These rules apply although the property involved is personal and not real.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ward v. Ward
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.