Gray v. Jacobsen’s Empirical Analysis
13 F.2d 959 · 1926
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently February 1997 · most notably Rorem v. Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co. (1957), Rhoderick v. Swartzell (1933)
17 federal appellate · 2 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 Acer v. . Hotchkiss · Burns v. Dreyfus · Omohundro v. Elkins · McArthur v. Scott
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is not a matter of strict right, but is purely equitable in its nature, dependent upon the facts and circumstances of each particular case, and that it will not be enforced when it would be inequitable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“subrogation is not a matter of strict right, but is purely equitable in nature, dependent upon the facts and circumstances of each particular case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. No. 77-1966“The doctrine of subrogation is a device to promote justice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Honey v. Davis
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.