McKenzie v. Boorhem’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently February 2019
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 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 Cullin-McCurdy Construction Co. v. Vulcan Iron Works · Friedman v. Schleuter · Smith v. School District No. 89 · Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Partain · Dodson v. Wade
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Generally, a compromise agreement may be enforced by motion in the original action. Arkansas State Highway Commmission v. Partain, 193 Ark. 803, 807 , 103 S.W.2d 53 ; Union Central Life Insurance Company v. Boggs, 188 Ark. 604 , 66 S.W.2d 1077 ; Ozark Insurance Company v. Leatherwood, 79 Ark. 252 , 96 S.W. 374 ; 15 C.J.S. Compromise and Settlement § 48, p. 770. “Under the Arkansas law, an attorney has no implied authority to enter into a compromise agreement. Turner furnishing Goods Company v. Snyder, 201 Ark. 699 , 146 S.W.2d 913 ; Cullin-McCurdy Construction Company v. Vulcan Iron Works, 93 Ark. 342 , 124 S.W. 1023. However, when a client gives his attorney specific authority to enter into a compromise agreement, such an agreement, if entered into by the attorney, is valid and binding. Byford v. Gates Brothers Lumber Company, 216 Ark. 400 , 225 S.W.2d 929 ; Moore v. Murrell, 56 Ark. 375 , 19 S.W. 973 ; 30 A.L.R.2d 944 -958; 5 Am.Jur., Attorneys at Law, Section 98, Pages 318-320; 7 C.J.S. Attorney and Client § 105, p. 928 et seq.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Plaintiffs cannot avoid such a settlement agreement on the ground that they do not like a release which defendants are willing even to execute in a form exactly as desired by plaintiffs (N.T. 97-99). See McKenzie v. Boor-hem, D.C.W.D.Ark.1954, 117 F.Supp. 433, 435-436 , where the court said at page 436: “ ‘The agreement was complete and binding at that time, and the fact that the written agreement tendered to Boorhem for signing might not have conformed to the oral settlement agreement would not in any wise affect the validity of said oral agreement.’ ””
2 later decisions 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.