Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 109 U.S. 84 - Porter v. Lazear

Porter v. Lazear’s Empirical Analysis

109 U.S. 84 · 1883

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
January 1934
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 12 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1934 · most notably Long v. Bullard (1886), Jones v. Van Doren (1889)

14 federal appellate · 12 district · 7 state decisions

120188318901900191019201930decided

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 Donaldson Assignee v. Farwell et al. · Dudley v. Easton · Graff v. Smith's Administrators · Kennedy v. Nedrow

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

  1. ““Upon this question of construction we are not bound by the opinion of the state court, and have no hesitation in disapproving the dictum, and in holding that the proviso ruled on was not in the nature of an exception to, or restriction upon, the operative words of the act, but was a mere declaration, inserted for greater caution, of the construction which the act must have received without any such proviso, and that the omission of the proviso in the recent bankrupt act (referring to the act of 1867 [Bankr. Act March 2, 1S67, c. 176, 14 Stat. 517 ]) does not enlarge the effect of the assignment or of the sale in bankruptcy, so as to include lawful rights which belong, not to the bankrupt, but to his wife.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It thus appears that the right of dower in Pennsylvania does not differ, in nature or extent, from the right of dower at common law, except so far as the local law has made it a chattel for the payment of debts of the husband, either by converting it into personalty, in his lifetime, by virtue of the effect attributed by that law to a judgment recovered against him or a mortgage executed by him, either of which could only be enforced in that state by a levy of execution in common form, or by giving his creditors, after his death, a lien upon the whole title in the land. The state court has accordingly constantly held that, with these exceptions, the right of dower is as much favored in Pennsylvania as elsewhere; that the old decisions are not to be extended; and that neither an absolute conveyance by the husband, nor an assignment by him for the benefit of creditors, whether executed voluntarily or under a requirement of the insolvent law of the state, impairs the wife’s right of dower.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “•‘But, under the provisions of the Bankruptcy Act, all that passes to the ' assignee by the assignment in. bankruptcy, or that can be sold by direction o.C the court, is property or rights of the bankrupt, or property conveyed by the bankrupt in fraud of creditors.””
    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.