Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 6 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Bemis v. Larkin.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bemis v. Larkin Anchor | green | “proceeded on the theory that they had to prove their claim as if it stood controverted. they did not seek to proceed as if upon a default” | 3 |
| 2 | Hoelzer v. Blum | green | “as a general rule the courts of this state will respect and not interfere with a trustee's decision unless it can be shown that the decision constituted an abuse of the discretion given the trustee by the testator” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.