Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 106 U.S. 648 - Fitzpatrick v. Flannagan

Fitzpatrick v. Flannagan’s Empirical Analysis

106 U.S. 648 · 1882

Citation profile

135
cited by 135 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
21
states following
April 1978
most recently cited

58 federal appellate · 10 district · 51 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 135 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1978 · most notably Embrey v. Jemison (1889), Huiskamp v. Moline Wagon Co. (1887)

58 federal appellate · 10 district · 51 state decisions — followed in 21 states

2701882189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Case v. Beauregard · Case v. Beauregard · Locke v. Lewis · Schmidlapp & Bros. v. S. D. Currie & Co.

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

  1. ““His [a creditor’s] right to appropriate the partnership property specifically to the payment of his debt, in equity, in preference to creditors of an individual partner, is derived through the other partner, whose original right it is to have the partnership assets applied to the payment of partnership obligations. And this equity of the creditor subsists as long as that of the partner, through which, it is derived, remains; that is, so long as the partner himself ‘retains an interest in the firm assets, as a partner, a court of equity will allow the creditors of the firm to avail themselves of his equity, and enforce through it the application of those assets primarily to payment of the debts due them, whenever the property comes under its administration.’””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““A subsequent promise, with full knowledge of the facts, is certainly equivalent to an original promise made under similar circumstances; and no one, acting with full knowledge, can justly say that he has been deceived by false representations. ‘Volenti non fit injuria.’ ””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““In that case it was hold, In respect to a firm admitted to be insolvent, that, transfers made by the individual partners of their interest in the partnership property converted that property into Individual property, terminated the equity of any partner to require the application thereof to the payment of, the joint debts, and constituted a bar to a bill in equity filed by a partnership creditor to subject it to the payment of his debt; the relief prayed for being grounded on the claim that these transfers were in fraud of his rights as a creditor of the firm.””
    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.