Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 104 U.S. 159 - Davis v. Wells

Davis v. Wells’s Empirical Analysis

104 U.S. 159 · 1881

Citation profile

209
cited by 209 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
33
states following
December 2014
most recently cited

51 federal appellate · 3 district · 124 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 209 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2014 · most notably Brewster v. Lanyon Zinc Co. (1905), Hi Fashion Wigs, Inc. v. Peter Hammond Advertising, Inc. (1973)

51 federal appellate · 3 district · 124 state decisions — followed in 33 states

41018811890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Russell v. Clark's Executors · Susan Lawrence v. Robert McCalmont · Douglass v. Reynolds, Byrne & Co. · Adams Cunningham and Company v. Calvin Jones

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

  1. ““A contract of guaranty, like every other contract, can only be made by the mutual assent of the parties. If the guaranty is signed by the guarantor at the request of the other party, or if the latter’s agreement to accept is contemporaneous with the guaranty, or if the receipt from him of a valuable consideration, however small, is acknowledged in the guaranty, the mutual as sent is proved, and the delivery of the guaranty to him or for his use completes- the contract. But if the guaranty is signed by the guarantor without any previous request of the other party, and in his absence, for no consideration moving between them, except future advances to be made to the principal debtor, the guaranty is in legal effect an offer or proposal on the part of the guarantor, needing an acceptance by the other party to complete the contract.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““If the guaranty is made at tile request of the guarantee, it then becomes (he answer of the guarantor to a proposal made to him, and its delivery to or for the use of the guarantee completes the communication between them and constitutes a contract.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"We think that the instrument sued on is not a mere unaccepted proposal. It carries upon its face conclusive evidence that it had been accepted by Wells, Fargo & Co., and that It was understood and intended to be, on delivery to them, as it took place, a complete and perfect obligation of guaranty. That evidence we find In the words, Tor and In consideration of one dollar to us paid by Wells, Fargo & Co., the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, we hereby guarantee,’ etc. How can that recital be true, unless the covenant of guaranty had been made with the assent of Wells, Fargo & Co., communicated to the guarantors? AVells, Fargo & Co. had not only assented to it, but had paid value for it, and that into the very hands of the guarantors, as they by the instrument itself acknowledged.””
    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.