Exchange Elevator Co. v. Marshall’s Empirical Analysis
1946
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Royal Indemnity Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (1975), Universal Underwriters Insurance v. Wagner (1966)
2 federal appellate · 43 state decisions
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 Henry & Coatsworth Co. v. Halter · Nelson v. Webster · Barr v. Post · Booth v. . Farmers and Mechanics' Nat. Bank · First National Bank v. Gibson
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[w]here there are two or more sureties for the same principal debtor, and for the same debt or obligation, whether on the same or on different instruments, and one of them has actually paid or satisfied more than his proportionate share of the debt or obligation, he is entitled to a contribution from each and all of his .co-sureties '”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Finally, the most important doctrine, perhaps, which results from the principle, Equality is equity, is that of contribution ... among joint debtors, co-sureties, co-contractors, and all others upon whom the same pecuniary obligation arising from contract, express or implied, rests. This doctrine is evidently based upon the notion that the burden in all such cases should be equally borne by all the persons upon whom it is imposed, and its necessary effect is to equalize that burden whenever one of the parties has, in pursuance of his mere legal liability, paid or been compelled to pay the whole amount, or any amount greater than his proportionate share....””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rodehorst v. Gartner““Where there are two or more sureties for the same principal debtor, and for the same debt or obligation, whether on the same or on different instruments, and one of them has actually paid or satisfied more than his proportionate share of the debt or obligation, he is entitled to a contribution from each and all of his co-sureties, in order to reimburse him for the excess paid over his share, and thus to equalize their common burdens. . . . The right, however, may be controlled or modified by express agreement among the co-sureties or debtors. The doctrine of contribution rests upon the maxim, Equality is equity . . . .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rodehorst v. Gartner
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.