Ryan v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
136 U.S. 68 · 1890
Citation profile
50 federal appellate · 9 district · 70 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 163 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2024 · most notably Georgia Florida Alabama Railway Company v. Blish Milling Company (1916), Lottery Case (1903)
50 federal appellate · 9 district · 70 state decisions — followed in 26 states
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 Kohl v. United States · Van Brocklin v. Anderson · United States v. Jones · Doolan v. Carr · Moore v. Crawford
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 163 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the principle is well established that a complete contract, binding under the statute of frauds, may be gathered from letters, writings, and telegrams between the parties relating to the subject-matter of the contract, and so connected with each other that they may be fairly said to constitute one paper relating to the contract.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bibb v. Allen · Hewitt v. Hutter““Whatever may be said as to the effect of this deed in passing title, if it was delivered only for purposes of examination, or if the previous memorandum of sale had been for any reason fatally defective under the statute of frauds, its recitals, coming as they do from the vendor, are competent for the purpose of showing the precise locality of the property which the memorandum of sale was intended to embrace.” (Page 84.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“"`A mere offer to sell real estate, upon specified terms, may undoubtedly be withdrawn at any time before its acceptance. Such is the general rule. But if the offer be accepted without conditions, and without varying its terms, and the acceptance be communicated to the other party without unreasonable delay, a contract arises, from which neither party can withdraw at pleasure.'" (Emphasis supplied) (p. 159)”
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.