Mercantile Trust Co. v. Hensey’s Empirical Analysis
205 U.S. 298 · 1907
Citation profile
77 federal appellate · 3 district · 62 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 165 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1990 · most notably United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. (1960), United States v. Moorman (1950)
77 federal appellate · 3 district · 62 state decisions — followed in 19 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Martinsburg Co v. March · Kihlberg v. United States · Sweeney v. United States · Chicago Co v. Price
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 165 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The other ground taken for a reversal In this ease is that the architect's certificate of July 29, .1901, was conclusive between the parties, and was a bar to the maintenance of this action. Mr. Palmer, in his letter or certificate, reported the completion of the buildings according to his interpretation of the plans and specifications, and that where deviations had been made from them it was where the same were inconsistent and ambiguous, and in all cases of inconsistency and ambiguity the work had been done according to the interpretation most beneficial to the houses. We do not think this certificate was conclusive, and it did not. therefore, bar the maintenance of this action. The language of the contract, upon which the claim is based, is set out in tlie foregoing statement, and while it provides that the work shall be completed agreeably to the drawings anil specifications made by Ai. D. Hensey, architect, in a good, workmanlike, and substantial manner, to the satisfaction and under the direction of Bates Warren, or the architect placed in charge by him, to be testified, by writing or certificate under the hand of Bates Warren, or the architect placed in charge by him, it omits any provision that the certificate shall bo final and conclusive between the parties. In other words, the contract provides that before the builder can claim payment at all he must obtain the certificate of the architect; but, after such certificate has been given, there is no provision which ba”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““An assignment of error based on the ground that no evidence was given in the trial court to enable the jury to assess the damages awarded will not be considered, where it does not appear that the plaintiff in error made any point on the trial in regard to the absence of such evidence, or that he asked the trial court to direct a verdict for him on account of its absence.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““To make suck a certificate conclusive requires plain language in the contract. It is not to be implied.””
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.