Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 124 MICH 402 - Ives v. Edison

Ives v. Edison’s Empirical Analysis

1900

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
7
states following
October 1994
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 1994

2 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

501900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Trustees of Columbia College v. . Thacher · Corning v. . Troy Iron and Nail Factory · Starkie v. Richmond · City of Logansport v. Uhl · Ritchey v. Welsh

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

  1. ““ * * * After the decree was entered in the court-below, the defendant treated the case as though it was finally adjudicated in his favor * * *. “While the case was awaiting a final determination, the defendant saw fit to ignore the rights of the complainant, and to ignore the legal proceedings, and proceeded to remove the stairway and to substitute another in the place of it. To accomplish this wrong has cost the defendant a large sum of money. To restore the easement thus arbitrarily taken will cost another large sum of money, the aggregate of which sums is so large that it is now said it will be entirely disproportionate to the injury done the complainant, and for that reason the court should not grant relief. If such a contention is to prevail, then indeed is the chancery court shorn of its power to protect persons in their right of property. If this doctrine is to be sanctioned, the person engaged in large enterprises may seize upon rights of less magnitude than his own, and, if an appeal is made to the law for protection; he may ignore the right of the injured and the pendency of the legal proceeding; and if he will put money enough into the new enterprise before a final decree is entered, so that it will cost him much more to restore the right he has wrongfully taken than a jury may regard the right as worth, he may prevent the entering of any decree whatever against himself, and may mulct the person who has appealed to the courts to protect his rights, in costs. This ”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Undoubtedly she [Mrs. Ives] has a legal right to have the stairs maintained until the end of time,” etc—”
    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.