Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 201 F.1d 962 - In re Watson

In re Watson’s Empirical Analysis

201 F. 962 · 1912

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
April 1976
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 1976

5 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

501912192019301940195019601970decided

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 York Manufacturing Company v. Arthur Cassell J B · Davis v. Schwartz · Holt v. Crucible Steel Company of America · Tiffany v. Boatman's Institution · Baldwin & Co. v. Crow

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

  1. ““And the statute itself is not without an indication that such is its true construction. It includes two classes of persons — purchasers for a valuable consideration without notice and creditors. Though it is not so expressed, the purchasers included are subsequent purchasers. It is expressly required that they be without notice. A purchaser has a hold on the property purchased, and he hak acquired it by his own activity. In connection with this class of persons then we find the four qualifications, subsequent, without notice, having a hold on the property, and that acquired by their own activity. Placed in the same category with them is another class of persons, to wit, creditors. Applying the maxim, ‘Noseitur a soeiis,’ is it not to be taken that the creditors called for are not the creditors generally, but subsequent', without notice, and who have acquired a hold on the property by their own activity J””
    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.