Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 102 U.S. 300 - Sims v. Everhardt

Sims v. Everhardt’s Empirical Analysis

102 U.S. 300 · 1880

Citation profile

68
cited by 68 later decisions
10
cited 10 times by the Supreme Court
20
states following
June 1959
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 2 district · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 68 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1959 · most notably Elk v. Wilkins (1884), Myers v. Hurley Motor Co. (1927)

8 federal appellate · 2 district · 40 state decisions — followed in 20 states

14018801890190019101920193019401950decided

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 Fairfield v. County of Gallatin · Lessee of Tucker v. Moreland · Irvine v. Irvine · Scranton v. Stewart

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

  1. ““ Without spending time to look at the reason, the authorities are all one way. An estoppel in puis is not applicable to infants, and a fraudulent representation of capacity cannot be an equivalent for actual capacity. Brown v. McCune, 5 Sandf. (N. Y.) 224; Keen v. Coleman, 39 Pa. St. 299 . A conveyance by an infant is an assertion of his right to’ convey. A contemporaneous declaration of his right or of his age adds nothing to what is 'implied in' his deed. An assertion of an estoppel against him is but a claim that he has assented or contracted. . But he can no more do that effectively than he can make the contract alléged to be confirmed.” .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““We think the preponderance of authority is that, in deeds executed by infants, mere inertness or silence, continued for a period less than that prescribed by the statute of limitations, unless accompanied by affirmative acts, manifesting an intention to assent to the conveyance, will not bar the infant’s right to avoid the deed.””
    2 later decisions 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.