Smith v. Fly’s Empirical Analysis
1859
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 64 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently April 1977 · most notably Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. United States (1963), Mason v. Peterson (1923)
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 64 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 The Bank of the United States v. James Daniel et al.
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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It appears to be well settled that in the sale of land, where there has been misrepresentation as to the quantity, though innocently made, and the parties were under a mistake as to the quantity, and the deficiency is so great as to have been material, in the object of the purchase, affecting the essence of the contract, equity will grant relief. [Citing authorities.] And this, says Judge Story, would be so, although the land was described as so many acres ‘more or less.’ It would certainly be so where the land is sold by the acre, and the statement of the quantity of acres in the deed is not mere matter of description, but is of the essence of the contract.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Taylor v. Hill
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.