Even most "successful" revolutionaries fail the latter. Mao would be an example.
So would be the Founders of the U.S., although arguably that wasn't even a revolution in the same sense as something like the French Revolution, rejecting the previous society altogether. After the American Revolution, there was continuity between the colonial charters of the States and their subsequent constitutions, mostly mediated by the federal constitution's prohibitions on particularly reviled aspects of English jurisprudence.
However, the common law was generally retained except where specifically abrogated by statute. Early post-Revolutionary American case law often cites cases themselves based on English common law, and sometimes directly cites English law.
In a very real sense, the American Revolution was a bourgeois revolution (and why that's a GOOD THING) that preserved the good parts of the previous order while excising the bad. It didn't eliminate law and order and install a murderous tyranny (unlike the French Revolution), but merely changed at least the stated locus of power from some distant (and mentally diseased) monarch to the people themselves.