Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 12 F.2d 491 - Erikson v. Hawley

Erikson v. Hawley’s Empirical Analysis

12 F.2d 491 · 1926

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
5
states following
April 2002
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 9 district · 13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently April 2002 · most notably United States v. American Medical Ass'n (1940), Foltz v. Struxness (1950)

11 federal appellate · 9 district · 13 state decisions

100192619301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Oregon Steam Navigation Company v. Winsor · Granger v. Craven · Menter Co. v. Brock · Cowan v. . Fairbrother · Godfrey v. Roessle

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

  1. “"`"It must not be forgotten that we are not to extend arbitrarily those rules which say that a given contract is void, as being against public policy, because if there is one thing which more than another public policy requires, it is that men of full age and competent understanding shall have the utmost liberty of contracting, and that their contracts when entered into freely and voluntarily, shall be held sacred, and shall be enforced by courts of justice. Therefore we have this paramount public policy to consider—that we are not likely to interfere with this freedom of contract." That is but saying that substantial justice and the obligation of contracts are entitled to superior consideration to the vague and indefinite notions of public policy, urged to avoid a contract for which the party has received full consideration. Such a defense always comes with a bad grace from a party to the contract who has received full consideration, and enjoyed the fruits of the contract that he alleges to have been made in contravention of law or principles of public policy.'"”
    2 later decisions 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.