Hecht v. Marsh’s Empirical Analysis
1920
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently February 2009
3 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
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 Simonton, Jones & Hatcher v. Liverpool, London & Globe Insurance · Gerard-Fillio Co. v. McNair · Bowman v. Wright · Rank v. Garvey · Hetzel v. Lyon
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Equity will not allow the statute of frauds to be used as an instrument of fraud, and will decree specific performance or hold the maker of a parol contract estopped from denying it when the other party, by virtue of it, and under and in pursuance of it, has so far acted as that it would be aiding in a fraud to permit the contract to be repudiated. And what equity would do our courts of law, under proper allegations, will also do.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““There is no reason, in our opinion, why a party to a contract within the statute of frauds may not be estopped by his conduct from disputing a subsequent oral modification of it to the same extent as a party to any other contract. It is a principle of equity, superior to any technical or artificial legal rules, which takes effect whenever the assertion of such a rule would result in perpetrating or ratifying a fraud.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““It has been held by this court that the general rule prohibiting the subsequent oral modification of contracts required by the statute to be in writing applies only with respect to those provisions which the statute expressly requires to be contained in the writing in order to make it valid. Hetzel v. Lyon, 87 Neb. 261 , [ 126 N.W. 997 (1910)]; Rank v. Garvey, 66 Neb. 767 , [ 92 N.W. 1025 (1902) ].””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Berube v. Montgomery
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.