Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 211 F.1d 856 - Sears v. Redick

Sears v. Redick’s Empirical Analysis

211 F. 856 · 1914

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
February 1935
most recently cited

3 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Relies on Svanburg v. Fosseen · Bichel v. Oliver · Baldwin v. Baldwin · Edwards v. Fry · Schoonover v. Schoonover

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

  1. ““The principle on which the exception to the statute of frauds which makes a written contract essential to a valid agreement to convey land rests, is that a court of equity will not permit the use of the statute to perpetrate a practical fraud, and the test of the exception is the answer to the question: Would the application of the statute to the parol contract inflict irreparable injury upon one who has so changed his situation in reliance upon it that he cannot be restored to his original position and cannot be adequately compensated in damages at law? If it would, the contract may be enforced in equity; if it would not, it may not be sustained.””
    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.