Rosenthal v. Heft’s Empirical Analysis
1928
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently August 2013 · most notably Clayman v. Goodman Properties, Inc. (1973), 23 Md. App. 280 - Crest Investment Trust, Inc. v. Comstock (1974)
5 federal appellate · 41 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 Lawson v. Mullinix · 30 N.J. Eq. 591 - Heid v. Vreeland · Lowry v. Downey · Chilton v. Brooks · Mahoney v. Mackubin
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““When [the purchaser] elected to ‘deduct’ the amount due on the mortgages from the ‘purchase price,’ he must have ‘deducted’ it to pay the mortgages, for otherwise, instead of deducting it from the purchase price, he would have bought the equity of redemption for the difference between the amount due on the mortgages, and the purchase price, but, in the absence of any evidence qualifying the language of the contract and the deed, we cannot assume that the [vendor] intended, and that [the vendee] understood, that he was to retain out of the purchase price the amount due on the mortgages, without any obligation on his part to pay the mortgages, so as to exonerate the [vendor] from any liability on account thereof. A more reasonable assumption is that by that arrangement he undertook, as a part of the purchase price, to pay the mortgages when and as they became due.” See also, Wright v. Wagner, supra.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Brice v. Griffin
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.