Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 142 U.S. 326 - Gisborn v. Charter Oak Life Ins Co of Hartford

Gisborn v. Charter Oak Life Ins Co of Hartford’s Empirical Analysis

142 U.S. 326 · 1892

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
June 1986
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 3 district · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1986 · most notably Carolina Portland Cement Co. v. Baumgartner (1930), Smith v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. (1934)

14 federal appellate · 3 district · 16 state decisions

1801892190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Bacon v. Rives · Kane v. Bloodgood · Seymour v. Freer · Lord v. Morris · New v. . Nicoll

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

  1. “•“‘Such conveyance was made and received upon the trusts, nevertheless, and to and for the uses, interests, securities, and purposes hereinafter limited, specified, described, and declared; that is to say, upon trust to receive the rents, issues, and profits of said premises, and to apply the same as received a§ follows, viz.,’ etc. Then followed in the declaration of trust the requirement to pay, first, the expenses of operating the mine, etc.; second! to pay the $400,-000 back to Stephens, trustee; third, to pay Gisborne a percentage of one-third of the net proceeds of the mine; and, fourth, to pay Gisborne $275,000. The appellant urged that the foregoing provisions for the trustee to receive the rents, issues, and profits of the mine require these various amounts to be paid ■put of the product of the ores of the mine, and are a prohibition against the taking of the mine itself to pay them. * * * Primarily, no doubt, the indebtedness was to have been paid out of the ores taken from the mine; but when the mine ceased to be productive this mode of paying the indebtedness failed. If the creditors could resort only to the ‘rents, issues, and profits,' and this meant only the ores, and they had ceased, the creditors had exhausted all their security. The meaning of the words ‘rents, issues, and profits’ has often been before the courts, and by a long line of decisions the courts of chancery have declared that, unless these words be connected with other words which restrain the me”
    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.