Ferguson v. Ferguson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• relying on § 96 (2) of Restatement (Third) of Trusts to hold that in terrorem clause was unen- forceable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Salce v. Cardello
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2023-09-26· cited 3×
• International Rescue Committee v. Mohammed
  Idaho Supreme Court· 2023-09-12· cited 2×

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Korn
  Idaho Supreme Court· 2009-12-24· cited 219×
• Pedro Pelayo v. Bertha Pelayo
  Idaho Supreme Court· 2013-06-21· cited 195×
• Losser v. Bradstreet
  Idaho Supreme Court· 2008-03-28· cited 187×
• Christensen Family Trust v. Christensen
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1999-12-10· cited 44×
• Taylor v. Maile
  Idaho Supreme Court· 2005-12-23· cited 32×
• Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC v. MacDonald
  Idaho Supreme Court· 2017-06-01· cited 29×
• Federal Land Bank of Spokane v. Parsons
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1989-07-06· cited 18×
• Edwards v. Edwards
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1992-10-01· cited 13×
• State, Department of Law Enforcement v. One 1990 Geo Metro
  Idaho Court of Appeals· 1995-02-02· cited 10×
• Beaudoin v. DAVIDSON TRUST CO.
  Idaho Supreme Court· 2011-11-01· cited 9×