Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 109 NEB 152 - Miller v. Ruzicka

Miller v. Ruzicka’s Empirical Analysis

1922

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
December 1960
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently December 1960

7 state decisions

5019221930194019501960decided

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 3 Tex. Civ. App. 37 - Meyer, Bannerman & Co. v. Smith · Graham v. Moffett · Cordova Coal Co. v. Long · Neel v. Clay · Dixie Industrial Co. v. Benson

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

  1. ““The plaintiff relies upon the fact that the property was valued by the parties at $4,500, which, it is claimed, is equivalent to a promise to pay that amount of money. However, we do not so interpret the contract. The obligation of the defendants in this case was to transfer certain property and to pay certain moneys in addition. The property, it is true, was valued in the contract at $4,500, but that was an estimate agreed upon by the parties for the purpose of determining what marginal difference in value between the properties must be covered by a money consideration. The defendants did not guarantee that their property was worth $4,500; nor did they, by their contract, agree to pay $4,500 in lieu of the property, should they refuse or fail to transfer the property to the plaintiff. The parties not having made such a contract, the court cannot establish such a one for them.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.