Broatch v. Boysen’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate ·

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

1. ““Complaint is made that the decree on the accounting requires each of the appellants to make the payment required of him within 60 days after the entry of the decree, and that it provides that in case any of them fails to do so the suit shall be dismissed as to him, because the title to 88 acres of the patented land is no longer in the Boysen Mining Company, and it cannot convey one-sixteenth interest therein to any of the appellants. But the decree requires the Boysen Mining Company to convey one-sixteenth interest of the patented land to each of the appellants upon his making the payment required of him. That conveytifice is conditioned on the payment required, and in the nature of the case the payment is conditioned upon the conveyance, and ample power is vested in the court below to prevent injustice under this decree. If the mining company has not now the title and power necessary to convey one-sixteenth interest in the entire patented tract, it may yet acquire that title and power before any of the appellants is ready to pay the amount required of him, and the mining company may make the conveyance. If it cannot and does not do so, the court below has ample jurisdiction and power, and may then exercise it by supplemental decree, or by modification of the decree for the accounting, so as to require the mining company to convey the one-sixteenth interest as far as it can do so, and to make compensation for its failure to convey one-sixteenth interest in the entire tract a”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Clarke v. Boysen

2. ““There was a provision in the agreement of 1899 that, if any of the parties to it failed to make the payments required of them under the contract, their interests in the partnership created thereby might be sold by the trustee on 30 days’ notice; and it is assigned as error that the court below failed to decree the sale of 9 shares of other parties to that agreement than Boysen and the appellants. But no reference is found in the assignment of errors, or in the brief of appellants, to any pleadings or proof in the record which would have sustained any such decree, and none has been discovered.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Clarke v. Boysen