Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 244 Or. 488 - Hay v. Erwin

Hay v. Erwin’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
3
states following
October 1990
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently October 1990

5 state decisions

201966197019801990decided

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.

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. ““ * * It is a general rule that, where a contract made between an attorney and client for the prosecution of an action is champertous, the attorney may recover from the client on the point of quantum meruit for services rendered, in the same manner as if the unlawful agreement had never existed. * * *”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Despite Mr. Erwin’s entering into an illegal agreement for fees, we are of the opinion that he ought to receive a reasonable fee for his services.””
    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.