Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 205 U.S. 285 - Ballentyne v. Smith

Ballentyne v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

205 U.S. 285 · 1907

Citation profile

148
cited by 148 later decisions
12
cited 12 times by the Supreme Court
10
states following
April 2013
most recently cited

48 federal appellate · 32 district · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 148 later decisions (12 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2013 · most notably Home Building & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell (1934), BFP v. Resolution Trust Corporation (1994)

48 federal appellate · 32 district · 26 state decisions — followed in 10 states

480190719101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Graffam v. Burgess · Schroeder v. Young · Pewabic Mining Co. v. Mason · Blossom v. The Milwaukee Railroad Company

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

  1. “[A] sale will not be set aside for mere inadequacy of price unless that inadequacy be so gross as to shock the conscience, or unless there be additional circumstances against its fairness. But if there be great inadequacy, slight circumstances of unfairness in the conduct of the party benefited by the sale will be sufficient to justify setting it aside.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Something may be said on each side of the question. On the one, that a court of equity owes a duty to the creditor seeking its assistance in subjecting property to the payment of debts to see that the property brings-something like its true value, in order that to the extent of that value the-debts secured upon the property may be paid; that it owes them something more than to merely take care that the forms of the law are complied with and that the purchaser is guilty of no fraudulent act. On the other, that it is the right of one bidding in good faith at an open and public sale to have the property for which he bids struck off to him if he be the highest and best bidder; that, if he be free from wrong, he should not be deprived of the benefits of his bid simply because others do not bid, or because parties-interested have done nothing to secure the attendance of those who would likely give for the property something nearer its value; that, if the creditors make no effort and are willing to take the chances of a general attendance, they have no right to complain on the ground that the property did not bring what it should have brought.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The question in this case is whether the master’s sale shall stand. It may be stated generally that there is a measure of discretion in a court of equity, both as to the manner and the conditions of such a sale, as well as to ordering or refusing a resale. The chancellor will always make such provisions for notice and other conditions as will in his judgment best protect the rights of all interested, and make the sale most profitable to all; and after a sale has once been made, he will, certainly before confirmation, see that no wrong has been accomplished in and by the manner in which it was conducted. ’ ’”
    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.