Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 173 VA 42 - Massie v. Dudley

Massie v. Dudley’s Empirical Analysis

1939

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
11
states following
April 2015
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 2 district · 54 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently April 2015 · most notably Loving & Evans v. Blick (1949), 9 Va. App. 152 - Virginia Real Estate Board v. Clay (1989)

8 federal appellate · 2 district · 54 state decisions — followed in 11 states

170193919401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Miller v. Ammon · Riley v. Chambers · Frank Waskey v. Joseph Hammer · Bratton v. Chandler · Roman v. Lobe

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

  1. ““Statutes regulating the real estate business, and requiring brokers and salesmen to procure a license before acting as such, have been enacted in many States. They have the same general purpose and are designed to protect the public from the fraud, misrepresentation and imposition of dishonest and incompetent persons. The reasons are not hard to see. The relations of trust and confidence which lie in the very nature of the business require that honesty and a fair amount of intelligence be exercised by those engaged in its pursuit. The records of the courts disclose far too many instances of litigation arising from unrestricted and unregulated agencies in this field. The regulation is an exercise of the police power, and not merely a revenue measure.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The agreement upon which the plaintiffs in error rely is illegal, not merely invalid. It is void as being contrary to a positive statute and to public policy. Not merely the mode of its performance, but its substance is unlawful. The imposition of the penalty emphasizes the illegality.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““So much of the Act as it material and pertinent in this case may be set out as follows: “The first section, 4359 (77), provides: “ ‘On and after January first, nineteen hundred and twenty-five, it shall be unlawful for any person, co-partnership association or corporation, to act as a real estate broker or real estate salesman, or to advertise or assume to act as such real estate broker or real estate salesman, without a license.’ “The next section, 4359(78), defines in clear terms what constitutes a real estate broker within the meaning of the Act: “ ‘A real estate broker within the meaning of this act is any person, . . . who for a compensation or valuable consideration sells or offers for sale, buys or offers to buy, or negotiates the purchase or sale or exchange of real estate, or who leases or offers to lease, or rents or offers for rent, any real estate or the improvements thereon for others, as a whole or partial vocation . . . One act for a compensation . . . shall constitute the person, ... a real estate broker or real estate salesman within the meaning of this act.’ “Section 4359(81) specifies the requirements for obtaining a license. “The twelfth section, 4359(88), provides a penalty by fine and imprisonment, or both, for a violation of any of the provisions of the act. “While Massie bases his claim upon his contract to furnish Dearing a customer for the land — a customer ready, willing and able to pay the price demanded by the owner — he contends that since he di”
    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.