Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 133 U.S. 473 - Board of Commissioners v. Diebold Safe Lock Co

Board of Commissioners v. Diebold Safe Lock Co’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
23
states following
August 1995
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 6 district · 38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1995 · most notably United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (1949), Burck v. Taylor (1894)

4 federal appellate · 6 district · 38 state decisions — followed in 23 states

11018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Boom Company v. Patterson · Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. Myers · Arkansas Valley Smelting Co. v. Belden Mining Co. · Hess v. Reynolds · Pope v. Allis

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

  1. ““When rights arising out of contract are coupled with obligations to be performed by the contractor, and involve such a relation of personal confidence that it must have been intended that the rights should be exercised and the obligations performed by him alone, the contract, including both his rights and his obligations, cannot be assigned without the consent of the other party to the original contract.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Besides, the first paragraph or count of the complaint (upon which line the trial proceeded) alleged that the defendant not only had notice of the assignment to the plaintiff, but consented to that assignment. If that were so, there would be a new and direct promise from the defendant to the plaintiff, and the assignors would be in so sense parties to the cause of action.”'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.