Mills v. Johnston’s Empirical Analysis
1859
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently September 1984
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 9 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 Hutchinson v. Hosmer
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The commission business is the creature of agriculture and commerce, and has grown up in all the great centers of trade throughout the United States. The commission merchant finds his proper and necessary place between the farmer or planter, who tills the soil and produces crops, and those by whom the productions of the earth are manufactured or consumed. To state that this kind of business is necessary to agriculture and commerce, is at the same time to state that the laws of the country extend their protection to it. The most enlightened courts of the Union have adjudged that the commission business is a lawful business, and that the commission merchant is as much entitled to a reasonable compensation for services that he may render to those with whom he transacts business, as any other person is entitled to be paid for any-other service. Embarrassing questions, growing out of the local usages of commission merchants, have sometimes been presented to the courts. But these questions are all solved by the application of a few plain and intelligible principles. -The question whether or not- a commission merchant is entitled to charge a certain commission in a given case, is answered by ascertaining whether or not the commission charged is a fair and reasonable compensation for a service rendered. If it be fair and reasonable, then it may he charged and recovered by law. If it be unreasonable or exorbitant, -then, in the absence of such a special contract as would preclude inq”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Scott v. Fabacher
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.