2 E.H. Smith 241 - Smith v. . Molleson’s Empirical Analysis
1896
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 99 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 118 later decisions — most recently May 2005 · most notably Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Aniero Concrete Co. (2005), Davenport v. Stratton (1944)
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 99 state decisions — followed in 20 states
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 Page v. . Krekey · Russell v. . Allerton · Gates v. . McKee · Brown v. Williams · Erie County Savings Bank v. . Coit
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 118 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It should also be observed that there is a clause in the contract, the material part of which reads, as follows: ‘Should the owner, at any time during the progress of the said work, request any alterations, deviations, additions or omissions from the said contract," he shall be at liberty .to do so, and the same shall in no way affect or make void the contract.’ The defendant having, by reference, in effect made the contract a part of the bond, must be deemed to have assented to this provision, and to any changes or deviations in performance from the building contract made under it. She has, in effect, guarantied the performance of a written contract between other parties, which, by its terms, permitted the parties to change it, or deviate from it.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“in this case there is no claim that the terms of the building contract, to which the defendant’s bond related, have in any respect been changed by the parties to it. The most that is claimed is that, in its performance, the parties have so far departed from its terms as to change the defendant’s condition, to her prejudice, and to deprive her of rights and benefits under the contract which, otherwise, she would be entitled to by subrogation. Where the party secured does some act which changes the position of the surety to his injury or prejudice, the latter is no longer bound.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““The parties had the right to give to the expression, ‘work performed on the building,’ a broader meaning which could very properly include the value of any work done or materials procured under the contract towards its • erection, although the granite procured and prepared had not yet been placed.” (p. 248.)”
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.