Schoen v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 state decisions

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

1. ““Appellant argues that the transaction was the same as though plaintiff had given his check to the bank, asked for the money on it, and after it was given to him, handed it back to the cashier with instructions to send that particular money to the Central Trust Company, and in support of that view cites Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bank, 109 Kan. 772 , 204 Pac. 992 . The situation is not the same. There the bank had the money with which the check in question could have been paid, and the theoretical transaction actually could have taken place. Here the bank did not have the money to pay a check of S3,675, or any substantial part of it. It had only a few hundred dollars on hand. The theoretical transaction actually could not have taken place.” (p. 614.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Martin Commission Co. v. Peoples State Bank