Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 128 MICH 72 - Scholtz v. Freud

Scholtz v. Freud’s Empirical Analysis

1901

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
2
states following
September 1913
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Beecher v. Bush · Canton Bridge Co. v. City of Eaton Rapids · Dutcher v. Buck · Colwell v. Britton

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

  1. ““McKinney was a defendant, who had permitted his default to be entered. He thereby admitted his liability, and the amount of damages only was to be determined. See 1 Green, Prac. 460. There was therefore no occasion to show the statements of McKinney, and they should have been excluded. As the court told the jury, such statements were not binding upon Freud.””
    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.