Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 235 F.1d 311 - In re Shelly

In re Shelly’s Empirical Analysis

235 F. 311 · 1916

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
April 1928
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Titusville Iron Co. v. . City of New York · Duplan Silk Co. v. Spencer

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

  1. ““Sec. 4. Should the contractor at any time during the progress of said work refuse or neglect to supply a sufficiency of materials or workmen, the owner shall have power to provide materials and workmen, after three (3) days’ notice, in writing, being given, to finish the said work, and the expense shall be deducted from the amount of the contract” “Sec. 9. All work and materials delivered on the premises to form part of the works are to be considered the property of the owner and are not to be removed without its consent; but the contractor shall have the right to remove all surplus materials after the completion of the work.””
    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.