Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 160 MOAPP 347 - Rule v. Anderson

Rule v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis

1911

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
10
states following
September 2001
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently September 2001 · most notably City of Montpelier v. National Surety Co. (1923), State ex rel. Elberta Peach & Land Co. v. Chicago Bonding & Surety Co. (1919)

2 federal appellate · 29 state decisions — followed in 10 states

2101911192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 North St. Louis Building & Loan Ass'n v. Obert · Gay v. Murphy · Bunn v. Jetmore · Burnes Estate v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. · Fullerton Lumber Co. v. Gates

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

  1. ““Finally, it is argued by the surety that the failure of plaintiffs to give written notice of the breach of the building contract by the contractor in respect of the stipulation relating to tbe time in wbieb tbe improvement should be completed constituted a forfeiture of tbe bond. That point is sufficiently answered by tbe observation that this ground of forfeiture was one tbe surety could waive, and we bold that tbe conduct of tbe manager of tbe company’s office at Kansas City, as depicted in tbe evidence of the plaintiffs, was a waiver on that ground. ’ ’”
    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.