Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 204 MICH 381 - White v. Wadhams

White v. Wadhams’s Empirical Analysis

1918

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
April 1960
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 1960

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

40191819201930194019501960decided

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 Wilson v. Campbell · Kirkwood v. First National Bank · Tripp v. Curtenius · Pierce v. State National Bank · Cate v. Patterson

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

  1. ““Is the certificate payable at an uncertain time? The rule of the bank with reference to time of payment was as, follows: ‘Thirty days’ notice must, in all eases, be given in writing to the cashier at his banking office, during banking hours, before a depositor will be entitled to withdraw his deposit or any part thereof.’ There does not seem to be anything uncertain about this rule. By virtue of its terms the certificate becomes due thirty days after notice in writing given to the cashier. The time is clearly therein fixed, which ’ imist inevitably happen, and therefore it complies with the rule laid down in Wilson v. Campbell, 110 Mich. 580 , 68 N. W. 278 , 35 L. R. A. 544 , where it is said, as to the certainty of time required: ‘I think it is sufficient if a time be fixed which must inevitably happen.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““This $700 certificate, however, was purchased by the Ypsilanti bank and that bank thereupon became a bona fide holder for value and the Ann Arbor bank became absolutely liable to it upon the certificate and it is not material that the Ann Arbor bank did not actually pay out money on the $700 certificate until after it knew of the dishonor of the $950 certificate of the Hastings bank, for it was clearly bound to pay it.””
    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.