Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 153 MO 625 - Dunham v. Hartman

Dunham v. Hartman’s Empirical Analysis

1900

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
5
states following
July 2002
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently July 2002

23 state decisions

5019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Springer v. Kleinsorge · Tatum v. Holliday · Wiley v. Robert · Gwathney, Dey Co. v. . Cason · Tull v. David

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

  1. “■ • “The doctrine of agency in the auctioneer for both seller and buyer •was established when the statute was such that the authority of an agent to bind his principal in a contract for the.sale of land need not have been' in writing, but might have been conferred- orally or have been implied. [Browne on Stat. of Frauds (5 Ed.), secs. 370,- 370a.] In 1887 our statute was amended so as to require the ágent’s authority to be in writing, since then it would be difficult to find any theory on which to base a claim on the implied agency of the auctioneer in a contract for the sale of land.” - • •”
    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.