Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 121 U.S. 310 - Huiskamp v. Moline Wagon Co.

Huiskamp v. Moline Wagon Co.’s Empirical Analysis

121 U.S. 310 · 1887

Citation profile

66
cited by 66 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
July 1997
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 8 district · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 66 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1997 · most notably Jewell v. Knight (1887), Reyburn v. Mitchell (1891)

26 federal appellate · 8 district · 18 state decisions — followed in 11 states

180188718901900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Case v. Beauregard · Fitzpatrick v. Flannagan · Stovall v. Banks · Wilson v. . Robertson

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

  1. ““In order to invalidate the mortgage of Hummel to Iluiskamp Bros., it must have been made with the intent on the part of Hummel to hinder and delay his other creditors, and Iluiskamp Bros, must have accepted it with the intent of assisting Hummel to hinder and delay his other creditors. A debtor being in failing circumstances and having the right to prefer a creditor, if the preferred creditor has a. bona tide debt, and takes a mortgage with the intent of securing such debt, and not with the purpose of aiding the debtor to hinder and delay other creditors, the mortgage is valid, even though the mortgagee knows that the debtor is insolvent, and that the debtor’s intention is to hinder and delay other creditors.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““One partner may, with the consent of his copartner, apply the partnership property .to the payment of his individual debt, as against a creditor of the partnership, who lias acquired no lien on the property. “Where such payment is claimed to be lawful on the ground that the property so applied has become the individual property of the partner making the payment, no creditor of the partnership acquires any right in respect of the property by the fact that he does not know of the transfer of the property to such partner, so long as he has no lien on the property, and it is applied in good faith by such partner to pay his Individual debt.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““It was only necessary that the disposition of the property should have been bona fide on the part of both parties, and without any intent to hinder or delay the plaintiff.””
    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.