Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 884 SW2D 126 - Warrick v. Wright

Warrick v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 2019

3 state decisions

20199420002010decided

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 27 Tenn. App. 182 - Davis v. Mitchell · Jourolmon v. Massengill · 28 Tenn. App. 388 - State Ex Rel. v. Nashville Trust Co. · Bell v. Shannon · Howard v. United States

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

  1. “neither the income from the trust payable to [the beneficiary] nor the principal held for his benefit is, at this time, within the reach of creditors while in the hands of the trustee. Since we believe it to be premature, we decline to decide the issue, relative to the principal, prospectively, i.e., will the distributions to be made to the beneficiary at age 35 and age 40 respectively be within the reach of creditors. Such is best left to another day when it is ascertainable that all contingencies have been met.”
    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.