Blake v. Hawkins’s Empirical Analysis
98 U.S. 315 · 1878
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1985 · most notably Patch v. White (1886), Evans v. Ockershausen (1938)
15 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 John Smith v. Robert Bell · Emerton v. Andrews
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ That the said Thomas P. Devereux, his heirs or assigns, shall invest for, or p£y to, the said Frances, at such times, in such proportions, and in such manner and form as she shall direct and require, to and.for her own sole and separate use, and subject to her own disposal by will, deed, or writings in nature thereof, or otherwise, to all intents and purposes (notwithstanding her coverture) as if she were- a feme sole and unmarried, the sum of $50,000 ; but if the said sum of money, or any part thereof, shall remain unpaid, or shall not be invested during'her life, and if the said Frances shall not by deed or will or writing in nature thereof, or by some other act, give, grant, dispose, or direct any payment, investment, or application of the same, then the said sum of money, or so much thereof as shall remain not paid, given, granted, disposed, or directed to be invested, paid, or applied, shall be considered as lapsing and the charge thereof as extinguished for the benefit of the said Thomas.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hawkins v. Blake““On the other hand, if the will contains no expressed intent to exert the power, yet, if it may be reasonably gathered from the gifts and directions made that their purpose and object were to execute it, the will must be regarded as an execution. After all, an appointment under a power is an intent to appoint, carried out, and, if made by will, the intent and its execution are to be sought for through the whole instrument.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lee v. Simpson““ If the will contains no expressed intent to exert the power, yet, if it may reasonably be gathered from the gifts and directions made that their purpose and object were to execute it, the will must be regarded as an execution. After all, an appointment under a power is an intent to appoint carried out, and if made by will the intent and its execution are to be sought for through the whole'instrument.””
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.