Samson v. Ward’s Empirical Analysis
1911
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1930
1 federal appellate · 4 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 Bowman v. Van Kuren · Naglee & Parrott v. Lyman · Arnd v. Sjoblom · Curtis v. Mohr · Henneberger v. Matter
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It was decided in Arnd v. Sjoblom, 131 Wis. 612 , 111 N. W. 666 , 10 L. R. A. (N. S.) 842 , 11 Ann. Gas. 1179, construing chapter 438, Laws of 1903, relating to such notes, that this statute did not make the note void in the hands of an Innocent purchaser for value in due course under sections 1676-25 and 1676-27 of the Negotiable Instruments Law.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Roys v. Carey
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.