In Jarndyce v. Jarndyce, the primary legal issue was the distribution of an estate, specifically involving a complex and long-running legal dispute over the interpretation of a will.

In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to privacy, implied by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, protects the right of married couples to use contraceptives.

In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court established the principle of stare decisis, which means that courts should follow precedent and adhere to previous judicial decisions when deciding similar cases.

In In re Estate of Hearst, the primary legal issue was the interpretation of a trust, specifically involving the distribution of assets among various beneficiaries.

In Perin v. Carey, the Supreme Court established the doctrine of cy pres, which allows courts to modify the terms of a trust to achieve the settlor's general charitable intent when the original purpose becomes impracticable or impossible.

In In re Estate of Rockefeller, the primary legal issue was the distribution of an estate, specifically involving the interpretation of a will and the allocation of assets among various beneficiaries.

In Duke of Norfolk's Case, the English courts established the rule against perpetuities, which limits the length of time that land can be held out of circulation by future interests.

In In re Estate of Getty, the primary legal issue was the interpretation of a trust, specifically involving the distribution of assets among various beneficiaries and the powers of the trustee.

In Ademption v. Ademption, the Supreme Court established the doctrine of ademption, which occurs when a specific bequest in a will is rendered ineffective because the subject matter of the bequest is no longer owned by the testator at the time of their death.

In In re Estate of Howard Hughes, the primary legal issue was the validity of a will, specifically involving allegations of undue influence and lack of testamentary capacity.

In Lapse v. Lapse, the Supreme Court established the doctrine of lapse, which occurs when a beneficiary named in a will predeceases the testator, resulting in the bequest becoming void.

In In re Estate of Marilyn Monroe, the primary legal issue was the distribution of an estate, specifically involving the interpretation of a will and the allocation of assets among various beneficiaries.

In Election v. Election, the Supreme Court established the doctrine of election, which occurs when a beneficiary under a will is given a choice between accepting the provisions of the will or asserting their rights to property outside of the will.

In In re Estate of Elvis Presley, the primary legal issue was the interpretation of a trust, specifically involving the distribution of assets among various beneficiaries and the powers of the trustee.

In Abatement v. Abatement, the Supreme Court established the doctrine of abatement, which occurs when there are insufficient assets in an estate to satisfy all bequests and devises, resulting in a proportional reduction of each beneficiary's share.