Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 216 MICH 591 - Stuart v. Dorow

Stuart v. Dorow’s Empirical Analysis

1921

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
February 1983
most recently cited

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Defendants sought to evade the terms of the contract by claiming that plaintiff and Eben C. Smith, who was acting for Stuart, made false representations to them as to the value of the land, and that Smith, who was pretending to represent defendants, did not disclose to them that this and adjoining lands were being purchased for a contemplated suburban village with rapid transportation service to Detroit via the Pere Marquette railway.””
    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.