Dellapiazza v. Foley’s Empirical Analysis
1896
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently December 1959 · most notably Sather Banking Co. v. Arthur R. Briggs Co. (1903), Savings Bank of San Diego v. Central Market Co. (1898)
5 federal appellate · 22 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 Savings & Loan Society v. Burnett · Tolman v. Smith · Holton v. Noble · Jones v. Clark · Brown v. Olmsted
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The law governing- general copartnerships, with a few well-defined exceptions, applies to mining copartnerships. Therefore, a mining copartner, who claims exemption from the general law of partnerships, must show his case to be within some one of those exceptions. This appellant has failed to do; and 1 see no just reason for excepting the case of appellant from the full operation and effect of the above-cited section, of the Civil Code — it being a part of the general law of partnerships, and its applicaiion to this case not being inconsistent with any exception heretofore recognized in favor of mining partnerships. Jones v. Clark, 42 Cal. 180 ; Stuart v. Adams, 89 Cal. 367 , 26 Pac. 970 . As to the ‘personal notice of the dissolution,’ required by the Code section cited, see Johnson v. Totten, 3 Cal. 343 , 58 Am. Dec. 412 , and Williams v. Bowers, 15 Cal. 321 , 76 Am. Dec. 480 . The notice must have been actual. The deed to the corporation was not even constructive notice to plaintiff of the sale.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kelley v. McNamee“Without the intention, and an express agreement of the parties, that the making and acceptance of the note should operate as payment or satisfaction of the original debt, to secure which it was given, it did not so operate, though it may have suspended the right of recovery until the maturity of the note.”
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.