Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2 Johns. Ch. 585 - Gillespie v. Moon

2 Johns. Ch. 585 - Gillespie v. Moon’s Empirical Analysis

1817

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
28
states following
December 1957
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 62 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1957 · most notably Simmons Creek Coal Co. v. Doran (1892), Hunt v. Rousmanier's Administrators (1823)

2 federal appellate · 62 state decisions — followed in 28 states

150181718201830184018501860187018801890190019101920193019401950decided

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

  1. ““It would be a great defect in what Lord Eldon terms the ‘moral jurisdiction’ of the court if there was no relief for such a case. Suppose Mrs. Mann had applied for relief, instantly, on discovery of the mistake, and immediately after the delivery of the deed. Was there no power in the whole administration of justice competent to help her? It has been the constant language of the courts of equity that parties can have relief in a contract founded in mistake as well as in fraud. The rule in the courts of law is that the written instrument does, in contemplation of law, contain the true agreement of the parties, and that the writing furnishes better evidence of the sense of the parties, than any that can be supplied by parol. But equity has a broader jurisdiction, and will open the written contract to let in an equity arising from facts perfectly distinct from the sense and construction of the instrument itself. ‘It must be an essential ingredient,’ says Lord Thurlow (1 Bro. 350), ‘to any relief under this head, that it should be on an accident perfectly distinct from the sense of the instrument.’ I have looked into most, if not all, of the eases on this branch of equity jurisdiction, and it appears to me to be established, and on great and essential grounds of justice, that relief can be had against any deed or contract in writing founded in mistake or fraud. The mistake may be shown by parol proof, and the relief granted to the injured party, whether he sets up the mistake af”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Such an allowance would be confounding all moral distinctions, and be giving countenance and sanction to the most flagrant injustice.””
    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.