Nelson v. . Loder’s Empirical Analysis
1892
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently November 1992
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 15 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 Kortright v. . Cady · Tuthill v. . Morris · Stow v. Russell · Haynes v. Thom
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If a debtor wishes to extinguish his liability for subsequently accruing interest, or demands some affirmative relief, he cannot retain the money, subject to his own use, but must devote it to the specific purpose of paying the debt, and put it within the power of the creditor to receive it at any time. He must keep his tender good. Tuthill v. Morris, 81 N. Y. 94 , 100; Harris v. Tex, 55 N. Y. 421 , 425; Gyles v. Hall, 2 P. Wms. 378; Bishop v. Church, 2 Ves. Sr. 371; Garforth v. Bradley, Id. 675; Stow v. Russell, 36 Ill. 18 ; Jones, Mortg. § 892; Thomas, Mortg. § 399; Coote, Mortg. (4th Ed.) 885. A subsequent lienor’s right to redeem a prior" security is derived from the owner of the mortgaged premises, and he is in this respect in no better position than the owner; and his tender, if he wishes to stop interest, or compel an assignment of the prior lien, must be as absolute and specific as that which the owner is required to make as a ground for affirmative relief or to stop the running of interest.””
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.