C. I. T. Corp. v. Guy’s Empirical Analysis
1938
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp. v. Kaplan (1956), Woodson v. Celina Mutual Insurance (1970)
4 federal appellate · 15 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 Young v. Masci · Cherwien v. Geiter · Nelson v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad · Sutton v. Bland · Henry v. . Hudson Manhattan R.R. Co.
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The nature, validity and interpretation of contracts are governed by the law of the place where made, unless the contrary appears to be the express intention of the parties.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““It should be noted that the statute under consideration refers to encumbrances on property ‘after it is removed’ into the state of Virginia, which would indicate that it was not intended to include encumbrances on property which was only transitorily or temporarily in the state. The word ‘removed,’ as used, implies not only the taking of the property into Virginia, but also the'allowing of the property to come to rest therein—the gaining a situs therein.””
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.