Hennessy v. Bacon’s Empirical Analysis
137 U.S. 78 · 1890
Citation profile
99 federal appellate · 3 district · 52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 218 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2007 · most notably Williams v. First National Bank (1910), Shappirio v. Goldberg (1904)
99 federal appellate · 3 district · 52 state decisions — followed in 19 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 Cleaveland v. Richardson
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 218 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... It is the case of the compromise of a disputed claim, the parties dealing with each other upon terms of perfect equality, holding no relations of trust or confidence to each other, and each having knowledge, or having the opportunity to acquire knowledge, of every fact bearing upon the question of the validity of their respective claims. Cleaveland v. Richardson, 132 U.S. 318, 329 [ 10 S.Ct. 100 , 38 L.Ed. 384 ] [33:384, 389]. Such a settlement ought not to be overthrown, even if the court should now be of opinion that the party complaining of it surrendered rights that the law, if appealed to, would have sustained... .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““If a party means to rescind a contract because of the failure of the other party to perform it, he should give a clear notice of his intention to do so, unless the contract itself dispenses with such notice, or unless notice becomes unnecessary by reason of the conduct of the parties”: 13 C. J. 619; Hennessy v. Bacon, 137 U. S. 78 ( 34 L. Ed. 605 , 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 17); St. Regis Paper Co. v. Santa Clara Lumber Co., 186 N. Y. 89 ( 78 N. E. 701 ).”
2 later decisions 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.