Foster v. Whelpley’s Empirical Analysis
1900
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently February 2005
4 state decisions
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 Foster v. Row · Allen v. Cadwell · Michigan Beef & Provision Co. v. Coll · Newlove v. Callaghan · Kercheval v. Wood & Luther
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is an answer to the last claim to say that, under the express provisions of the statute and the decisions of this court, the undivided interest which Mr. Whelpley had in the land, prior to the issuance of the patent, could be reached by execution” citing section 1332, 1 Comp. Laws (1 Comp. Laws 1915, § 507) ; Kercheval v. Wood, 3 Mich. 509 ; Allen v. Cadwett, 55 Mich. 8 ( 20 N. W. 692 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lipp v. Jacobs
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.