Blankenship v. Childress’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 1975
7 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 Arwood v. Hill's Administrator · Leicht-Benson Realty & Construction Corp. v. J. D. Stone & Co. · Long v. Flory & Garber · Paschall & Gresham v. Gilliss · Patton, Temple & Williamson, Inc. v. Garnett
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The broker’s contract, whereby he is empowered to make the sale of real estate at a stipulated price, is not void simply because there is no provision stated as to how the purchase price is to be paid. Such terms are not essential to the validity of such a contract. It is true that where there is no stipulation as to how the price shall be paid, that is whether on credit or for cash, generally it is held that the broker must produce a purchaser who will pay all in cash. 8 Am.Jur., Brokers, § 63.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mitchell v. Mercer
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.