Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 199 KY 161 - Remedial Plan v. Ott

Remedial Plan v. Ott’s Empirical Analysis

1923

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
4
states following
February 1968
most recently cited

2 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently February 1968

2 district · 8 state decisions

4019231930194019501960decided

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.

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

  1. ““As will be observed by a glance at the instrument copied above, the negotiable part thereof begins ‘within ten —■-.’ Probably the parties intended to fill the blank %Vith the word ‘months,’ but- failed to do so. The instrument was therefore incomplete as well as irregular on its face. Being so, appellant was not a holder in due course.””
    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.