Bostwick v. . Beach’s Empirical Analysis
1886
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 70 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1972 · most notably Epstein v. . Gluckin (1922), Townsend v. Vanderwerker (1895)
6 federal appellate · 70 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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 Worrall v. . Munn · Payne v. . Becker · Demarest v. Ray
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We entertain no doubt that where the executors of the will of a deceased person, empowered by the terms of the will to sell his real estate, enter into an executory contract for such sale, performance of such Contract may be enforced in equity, at the suit of the purchaser.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Sanford v. Story · Sanford v. Story““ If a seller of land is not able to comply fully with the contract, either in respect of the quantity of land or the extent of the estate, the court will, at the election of the buyer, decree specific performance of the contract, so far as the same can be performed, awarding compensation to the purchaser by way of abatement from the purchase-price, for any deficiency in title, quantity of land, or other matters touching the estate, the value of which are capable of being ascertained, and thus compensated without doing injustice to either party.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Polisiuk v. Mayers“The purchaser is entitled to the rents and profits from the time when, according to the terms of the contract, possession should have been delivered, or, if the vendor has remained in possession, he is chargeable with the value of the use and occupation for the same period, and the purchase is chargeable with interest on the purchase money, if it remained in his hands unappropriated.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bateman v. . Hopkins
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.