Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 87 KAN 652 - Kennett v. Kidd

Kennett v. Kidd’s Empirical Analysis

1912

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
5
states following
November 1979
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently November 1979

3 federal appellate · 15 state decisions

501912192019301940195019601970decided

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 Ginter v. Ginter · In Re the Estate of McGraw · Wood v. Hammond · State ex rel. Supreme Lodge Knights v. Vandiver · Pape v. Capitol Bank

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

  1. ““There is no trust for charitable uses, there is no charity. There is simply a gift outright to the local camp of a fraternal order of a large amount of property, real and personal, to be used, not as the' law provides but as the camp may see fit. While, corporations usually are not prohibited from accepting devises and bequests, and while one of sound mind may give his property to whatsoever persons he desires, it appears to be the legislative policy of the state that fraternal beneficiary societies are to be governed by rules and restrictions applying specifically to them; and indeed this may well be, because such societies are not corporations of the ordinary kind or in the usual acceptation of the term. They are associations' of men who voluntarily combine for mutual benefit, but who can do so only under the terms and provisions prescribed by the legislature.” (Kennett v. Kidd, 87 Kan. 652, 659 , 125 Pac. 36 .)”
    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.