Slide & Spur Gold Mines v. Seymour’s Empirical Analysis
153 U.S. 509 · 1894
Citation profile
39 federal appellate · 4 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1980 · most notably Williams v. Neely (1904), Hooper v. Central Trust Co. (1895)
39 federal appellate · 4 district · 14 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 Fisher v. Shropshire · Cordova v. Hood · Brown v. Gilman · Refeld v. Woodfolk
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A court of chancery regards the transfer of real property in a contract of sale and the payment of the price as correlative obligations. The one is the consideration for the other, and the one failing leaves the other without a cause.” Refeld v. Woodfolk, 22 How. 318 , 327, 16 L. Ed. 370 ; Slide & Spur Gold Mines v. Seymour, 153 U. S. 509 , 517, 14 Sup. Ct. 842 , 38 L. Ed. 802 .”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Undoubtedly, a lien of the character we are considering may be defeated if the grantor or vendor do any act manifesting an intention not to rely on the land for security; but this must be an act substantially inconsistent with the continual existence of the lien, and can not be inferred from the mere fact that the parties may not have contemplated the assertion of the lien in the first instance.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““When one person has got the estate of another, he ought not, in conscience, to be allowed to keep it without paying the consideration. It is in this principle that courts of equity proceed as between vendor and vendee.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.