Reilly v. . Dodge’s Empirical Analysis
1892
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently May 1938
14 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 Emery v. . Baltz · Bostwick v. . Van Voorhis · Sullivan v. New York & Rosendale Cement Co. · Hunt v. . Roberts · Andrus v. Bealls
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.
““Unless the sureties can be held by him to the liability which they assumed for at least a reasonable time after the notice he may be subjected to liability of the gravest kind for the acts of others, without any means of protection. That this responsibility cannot be thrown upon the sheriff by the sureties at will and upon notice merely, would seem to be clear upon principle, and is sustained by abundant authority. It is sufficient to cite the cases that sustain this proposition, or some principle leading up to it, without comment: Bostwick v. Van Voorhis, 91 N. Y. 363 ; Barnard v. Darling, 11 Wend. 29 ; Andrus v. Bealls, 9 Cow. 693 ; Hart v. Brady, 1 Sandf. 626 ; Hunt v. Roberts, 45 N. Y. 696 ; Burgess v. Eve, L. R. 13 Eq. 450; Hough v. Warr, 1 Carr. & P. 151; Hassell v. Long, 2 Maule & S. 363, 370; Calvert v. Gordon, 2 Man. & R. 124; De Col. Guar. (2nd ed.), p. 346; Fell, Guar. (2nd ed.) 530.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dunn v. Bailey““Whether a surety upon a penal bond, conditioned upon the faithful performance of his duty, by a public officer, like a deputy sheriff, can terminate his liability without the consent of the sheriff or the principal in the bond, or can become discharged without any new consideration, is a point that is not necessary to decide in this case. It is entirely safe to hold, however, that a notice by the surety, such as was served in this case, does not operate to discharge the sureties until a reasonable time has elapsed sufficient to enable the sheriff to give notice to the deputy and the other sureties, and to permit a new bond to be given. ’ ’”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dunn v. Bailey
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.