Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 181 Minn. 327 - Marin v. Olson

Marin v. Olson’s Empirical Analysis

1930

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
July 1967
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently July 1967

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

201930194019501960decided

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 Holland v. Duluth Iron Mining & Development Co. · Vercellini v. U. S. I. Realty Co. · Bartlett v. Stephens · Clark v. Wilder · Parker v. Merritt

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

  1. ““Defendant relies upon the case of Vercellini v. U. S. I. Realty Co., 158 Minn. 72 , 196 N.W. 672 . A careful reading of that opinion clearly shows that the decision of the lower court in the instant case cannot be reversed on its authority. That was an action seasonably brought to recover money paid on a contract sold in violation of the Blue Sky Law. It was against the original vendor and recovery was permitted. “However, where, as in this case, a receivership is in force and the rights of creditors and third parties have intervened, a different situation is presented. Defendant cannot escape the liability imposed by the constitution (article 10, § 3) on stockholders in a corporation by asserting that the sale of stock to him violated a penal statute.””
    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.