Schultz v. England’s Empirical Analysis
106 F.2d 764 · 1939
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently April 2019
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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 Ex parte Baldwin · Pringle v. Wilson · 21 Cal. App. 480 - Earle v. Kelly · City of Long Beach v. Metcalf · Realty Dock & Improvement Corp. v. Anderson
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The provision is that any additions, alterations and improvements except movable furniture * * * shall attach to the realty. In other words, the parties unquestionably were assuming to except something which, without the exception, would have been included in the phrase, “additions, alterations or improvements.” Such “furniture” as tables, chairs, etc., could never be considered to be an “addition, alteration or improvement” and therefore. would not have to be excepted from the broader term in order to allow removal by the tenant. * * * It is extremely unlikely that this expression would be used to refer to chattels owned by the lessee, which were not affixed in some manner to the premises.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mitchell v. Lovato““It seems to us that the word ‘furniture’ must be given a meaning broad enough to embrace any movable equipment installed in the office to facilitate the transaction of the tenant’s business, and that the words ‘movable office furniture’ shall be deemed as synonymous with the words ‘movable fixtures,’ as distinguished from fixtures which are so affixed to the realty that their removal would deface or injure the walls, ceilings, or floors.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mitchell v. Lovato“It is elemental that the trustee stands in the shoes of the bankrupt ... and can assert no greater rights against the [defendant] than could have been asserted by the bankrupt in the absence of bankruptcy proceedings.”
1 later decision 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.