Gazlay v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

29 federal appellate · 26 district · 32 state decisions

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

1. ““Provided, however, that if said lessee shall assign this lease or underlet said premises or any part thereof, or if said lessee’s interest therein shall be sold under execution or other legal process, without the written consent of said lessors, their heirs or assigns, is first had, or if said lessee or assigns shall fail to keep any of the other covenants of this lease by said lessee to be kept, it shall be lawful for said lessors, their heirs or assigns, into said premises to re-enter and the same to have again, repossess and enjoy as in their first and former estate, and thereupon this lease and everything therein contained on the said lessors’ behalf to be done and performed, shall cease, determine, and be utterly void.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Nelson v. Denmark · In re Prudential Lithograph Co.

2. ““It is not necessary to consider the condition in question further than it relates to the assignment of the leasehold estate. It prohibits both voluntary and involuntary assignments. In so far as it prohibits voluntary assignments, the language is, ‘If said lessee shall assign this lease,’ and in so far as it prohibits involuntary assignments the language is, ‘or if said lessee’s interest therein shall he sold under execution or other legal process.’ ” “It is certain that passage of the leasehold estate from the bankrupt, Brown, to the ap-pellee [trustee], as of the date of adjudication, was not a breach of either * * * condition. It was a passage by operation of law and not by the act of the bankrupt; and the passage was not through the medium of a sale. * * * This * * * being true — i. e., that the passage of the leasehold estate from the bankrupt to appellee [trustee] was not prohibited by the condition — it would seem that a sale by the appellee [trustee] for the benefit of creditors is not prohibited thereby. * * * And a consideration of the language of the condition shows that a sale by appellee [trastee] of the leasehold estate is not within its terms. It is not within the voluntary branch thereof, because, if it may be said to be a voluntary assignment, it is not an assignment by 'said lessee/ It is not- within the involuntary branch thereof, for though it may be said to be an involuntary assignment and, possibly also (though hardly so) a sale under legal process, it ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Ehrhardt

3. ““The passage of the lessee’s estate from Brown, the bankrupt, to Williams, the trustee, as of the date of the adjudication, was by operation of law, and not by the act of the bankrupt, nor was it by sale. The condition imposed forfeiture if the lessee assigned the lease or the lessee’s interest should be sold under execution or other legal process without lessor’s written consent. A sale by the trustee for the benefit of Brown’s creditors was not forbidden by the condition and would not be in breach thereof. It would not be a voluntary assignment by the lessee, nor a sale of the lessee’s interest, but of the trustee’s interest, held under the bankruptcy proceedings, for the benefit of creditors. * * *”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Ehrhardt