Hurd v. Albert’s Empirical Analysis
1931
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 71 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently November 2014 · most notably State Farm Mut Automobile Ins Co v. Duel (1945), Marra v. Aetna Construction Co. (1940)
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 71 state decisions — followed in 10 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.
Relationships
Relies on Trustees of Columbia College v. . Thacher · McClure v. . Leaycraft · Guardianship of Snowball · Forstmann v. Joray Holding Co., Inc. · Jackson v. Stevenson
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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The doctrine of res judicata was never intended to operate so as to prevent a reexamination of the same question between the same parties where, in the interval between the first and second actions, the facts have materially changed or new facts have occurred which may have altered the legal rights or relations of the litigants.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“equity courts will not enforce restrictive covenants by injunction in a case where, by reason of a change in the character of the surrounding neighborhood, not resulting from a breach of the covenants, it would be oppressive and inequitable to give the restriction effect, as where the enforcement of the covenant would have no other result than to harass or injure the defendant, without benefiting the plaintiff”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Fairchild v. Raines
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.