Draft v. Hesselsweet’s Empirical Analysis
1917
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently June 1944
1 federal appellate · 19 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 Ruhl v. Mott · Lee v. McClelland · Hubbardston Lumber Co. v. Bates · Craig v. Bradley · Hurt v. Miller
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This court has said again and again that if one has been defrauded he must complain of it promptly after discovering the fraud. ’ ’”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““His acts indicated that he intended to retain the premises and abide by his purchase, notwithstanding the fraud. He continued to live upon and operate the farm and to take the avails thereof. He made improvements on the buildings and paid an installment on the purchase price in 1912, and we think his testimony fairly shows that he would have paid the second note in 1913 had it not been for the lack of funds. Under these circumstances he must be deemed to have waived whatever right he had to complain of the fraud” — citing cases.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Parkyn v. Ford
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.