98 N.J. Super. 89 - In Re Wolf’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently May 2006
13 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 In Re the Estate of Coe · In Re Estate of Cook · Amoskeag Trust Co. v. Haskell · In Re Estate of Wehrhane · Taylor Estate
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[T]he issue to be resolved is not whether Ramon would take as an heir at law or next of kin if C. Franklin or Clarence had died intestate. Rather, the basic questions presented by the suits ... involve a construction of the writings to determine whether Ramon is an intended beneficiary (1) within the meaning of the word ‘children,’ as that word is used in the deed of trust of his natural father C. Franklin, and (2) within the meaning of the word ‘issue,’ as that word is used in the will of his grandfather Clarence.... “To ascertain the intent of the settlor and testator, respectively, requires a reading and analysis of the language used in the trust instrument and the will in light of all the surrounding facts and circumstances.... Further, at least so far as the grandfather’s will is concerned, ‘[n]ot only may the circumstances surrounding the execution [thereof be considered] but so also may the circumstances from then on until the testator’s death.’ ” (Citations omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““With respect to both the income and the corpus distribution of Trust B, the will provides: “ ‘In the event any of my said children are then deceased, said deceased child’s share shall be paid to his or her issue, if any, per stirpes, and in the event that any such deceased child should not leave issue, his or her share then shall be equally divided among the remaining children above-named and the issue of any of said children who may then be deceased, per stirpes.’ (Emphasis added)””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“issue” as used therein is to have a more limited meaning so as to exclude a grandchild of the testator merely because he had been adopted by another .... The grandfather knew of his grandson’s adoption. Had he intended to eliminate [the child] from those who would otherwise take under the will as”
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.