Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 121 F.2d 861 - Hoffman v. Sheahin

Hoffman v. Sheahin’s Empirical Analysis

121 F.2d 861 · 1941

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
2
states following
March 2017
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently March 2017

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions

6019411950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Hunt v. Rousmanier's Administrators · Brooklyn Bank v. . Barnaby · 14 E.H. Smith 677 - Dykman v. . Keeney · Holmquist v. Gilbert · Walker v. Garland

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

  1. “We think this extends the “agency” beyond its intended scope and ignores its true nature as well as the basis upon which payment is held to give new life to the debt. The “agency” is not one solely on behalf of the debtor, if indeed it is truly one at all. It is rather a power coupled with an interest, irrevocable by the donor. In exercising it the donee acts on behalf of the creditor, whether himself or another, rather than for the debtor, though the latter has empowered him to do the act. The application therefore lacks the voluntary character which gives to the debtor’s own act, or to that of an agent acting solely on his account, the character of waiver of immunity and acknowledgment that the debt retains vitality.”
    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.