Allen v. Eneroth’s Empirical Analysis
1912
Citation profile
2 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 1961
2 district · 8 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 George A. Hormel & Co. v. American Bonding Co. · Mayes v. Lane · Consaul v. Sheldon · Brandrup v. Empire State Surety Co. · Suter v. Page
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The bond covered all damages and losses sustained by Allen in consequence of the contractor’s default. His default occasioned the lien suits in defending which Allen incurred this expense for the services of his attorney. We think the expense so incurred was properly charged under the bond.””
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.