Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 121 F.2d 864 - Brice v. Walker

Brice v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

121 F.2d 864 · 1941

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
December 1995
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 1995

6 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

50194119501960197019801990decided

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 Bank of Wildwood v. Kerl · Hoffman v. Sheahin · McKenzie v. Matthews · Slingerland v. Sherer · King v. Riddle

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.

  1. “The parties agree that the question to be determined is whether the obligation is a simple debt or one under seal. If the action is based upon a simple debt, it is conceded that the statute has run. It is clear that an unsecured note is a simple debt and the action upon it must be brought within three years from maturity. It is also clear that a deed of trust is a sealed instrument and the period of limitation is twelve years. Plaintiff contends that the present indebtedness is evidenced and acknowledged by the deed of trust, an instrument under seal; that the note and the deed of trust, being parts of the same transaction, are to be considered as one instrument; and that the applicable period of limitation is twelve years. These contentions are not in accord with the law.”
    1 later decision 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.