Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 107 KAN 693 - Arnett v. Wescott

Arnett v. Wescott’s Empirical Analysis

1920

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
6
states following
February 1950
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently February 1950

1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

701920193019401950decided

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 Jenkins v. Harrison · Anderson v. Anderson · Robert Barry v. Griffith Coombe · Ames v. Ames · Niquette v. Green

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

  1. ““Nor does it signify to whom the memorandum is addressed; it may be to a third person, and yet be a good writing to satisfy the statute of frauds. Form is not important. . . . The reason for this is clear. The memorandum is only necessary to evidence the contract, not to constitute it.” (p. 633.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““An examination of the cases on this subject will show that courts of equity are not particular with regard to the direct and immediate purpose for which the written evidence of a contract was created.” (651.)”
    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.