Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 123 FSUPP 835 - Brent v. Westerman

Brent v. Westerman’s Empirical Analysis

1954

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
June 1985
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 1985

3 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

501954196019701980decided

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 General Exchange Ins. Corp. v. Young · Pollman & Bros. Coal & Sprinkling Co. v. City of St. Louis · Rhodus v. Geatley · Vondera v. Chapman · St. Joseph School Board ex rel. Donovon v. Hull

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

  1. “* * * It is the settled law in Missouri that if there be a controversy between a claimant or creditor and a tortfeasor or debtor and, after discussion of the substance of the claim, the tortfeasor or debtor tenders to the claimant or creditor some amount, upon the condition that its acceptance will be in full settlement of all claims, and the claimant or creditor accepts the tender, an accord and satisfaction results as a matter of law (even though the creditor may protest the adequacy of the amount, or even state other conditions of his acceptance), for the simple and good reason that one who accepts a conditional tender assents to the conditions of the tender, Gulfport Wholesale Lumber Co. v. Boeckeler Lumber Co., Mo.App., 287 S.W. 799, 800, as he must accept the tender as made or not at all.”
    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.