207 Mo. App. 74 - Austin v. Ransdell’s Empirical Analysis
1921
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Board of Education ex rel. Philip Carey Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. · C. A. Burton Machinery Co. v. Ruth · C. A. Burton Machinery Co. v. Ruth · Rigler v. McClure · 206 Mo. App. 56 - Jordan v. C., B. Q.R.R. Co.
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[5] We think that, before these defendants can be held upon the cause of action herein sought to be enforced, the plaintiff should show the material his assignor sold to the contractors, and that the same entered into the construction of the building. Again, plaintiff should, before requiring defendants to respond in damages, show affirmatively that recourse against the contractors is unavailing, and this was not done, at least so far as concerns George C. Wright, the son. So far as the record discloses, an execution on the judgment against him would obtain the money. If so, it is hard to see how plaintiff can demand of the individual members of the board that they pay the bill.””
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.