Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 99 KAN 472 - Bryant v. Flanner

Bryant v. Flanner’s Empirical Analysis

1917

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
2
states following
April 1961
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently April 1961

2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

100191719201930194019501960decided

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 McNutt v. McComb · Ewing v. Nesbitt

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

  1. ““Certain rules, as that a gift or devise in a will can not be cut down by a subsequent provision, have less authority and are applied with greater- discrimination than formerly. Other rules, as that the whole will should be considered and effect given to every part if consistent with a general purpose apparent from the entire instrument, are more depended on.” (p. 476.)”
    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.