Crary v. Dye’s Empirical Analysis
208 U.S. 515 · 1908
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently September 1979 · most notably Old Colony Trust Company v. City of Omaha (1913), State of Oklahoma v. State of Texas (1925)
11 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
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 Hobbs v. McLean · Cooper v. Reynolds · Brant v. Virginia Coal and Iron Company et al. · John Voorhees v. James Jackson
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The principle of estoppel is well settled. It precludes a person from denying what he has said or the implication from his silence or conduct upon which another has acted. There must, however, be some intended deception in the conduct or declarations, or such gross negligence as to amount to constructive fraud. Brant v. Virginia Coal & I. Co., 93 U. S. 326 , 23 L. Ed. 927 ; Hobbs v. McLean, 117 U. S. 567 , 29 L. Ed. 940 , 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 870. And in respect to the title of real property, the party claiming to have been influenced by the conduct or declarations must have not only been destitute of knowledge of the true state of the title, but also of any convenient and available means of acquiring knowledge. Where the condition of the title is known to both parties, or both have the same means of ascertaining the truth, there can be no estoppel.””
3 later decisions 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.