Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 15 INDAPP 84 - Moore v. Hubbard

Moore v. Hubbard’s Empirical Analysis

1896

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
3
states following
November 1961
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently November 1961

6 state decisions

4018961900191019201930194019501960decided

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 Miller v. Billingsly · Stanton v. Kenrick · Waterman v. Morgan · Rodenbarger v. Bramblett · 8 Ind. App. 390 - Judson v. Romaine

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

  1. ““Whether or not the consideration for the execution of the instrument sued on passed to appellant from the payee of the note, or from some one else, it would still he sufficient to sustain it if there was a valuable consideration passed to her from any one, by reason of which the instrument was executed.””
    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.