Ellsworth v. Hurt’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently December 1985
11 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 Hartford Accident Indemnity Co v. People State Illinois · Duke v. National Surety Co. · Farmer v. Rutherford · Salo v. Pacific Coast Casualty Co. · People Ex Rel. McLaughlin
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This court has held that when a statute requires a bond to be given and a bondsman undertakes to furnish it, the obligation of the bond which is imposed by the statute is read into the terms of the bond, and any of its text at variance with the statutory requisites is ignored. Such is the doctrine of the notable case of Barber County Comm’rs v. Lake State Bank, 122 Kan. 222, 226-227 , 252 Pac. 475 . Likewise, in Duke v. National Surety Co., 130 Wash. 276 , 227 Pac. 2 , it was held that conditions in a statutory bond which are repugnant to the statute are to be treated as surplusage.” (1. c. 233)”
2 later decisions 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.