Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 248 N.Y. 480 - Rodkinson v. Haecker

Rodkinson v. Haecker’s Empirical Analysis

1928

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
3
states following
March 2011
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently March 2011 · most notably Gair v. Peck (1959), Kramer, Levin, Nessen, Kamin & Frankel v. Aronoff (1986)

10 federal appellate · 35 state decisions

1501928193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Matter of Howell · Kellogg & Sandford v. Potter · Stenton v. . Jerome · Anding v. Levy · Fournier v. . Union Bag and Paper Company

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

  1. ““ As a general principle, a lawyer may make a contract with his client either for future or past services. Such a contract for compensation will be enforced unless it appears to have been procured by fraud, deceit, overreaching, undue influence, or through any other means which would move a court of equity to modify or set it aside. The circumstances may be many, which would prevent the enforcement of the agreement. No one can undertake to specify the instances. Sufficient to state that no undue advantage can be taken of the relationship or of the circumstances or of the client to procure such a contract. The courts are very sensitive of the honor of the bar. Transactions between a lawyer and his client must be fair. Unless unreasonable upon its face, the contract, however, like any other contract is presumed to be fair until the contrary appears. It is a matter of proof. Seldom, if ever, can a contract be sued upon without the circumstances of the transaction appearing. A lawyer and his client may have an account stated between them the same as other persons. “It is always open, however, for the client to plead or to show that for some equitable reason it should not be enforced. Equity is a patient listener to all such charges, examines them carefully and thoroughly. When groundless, however, the contract or the account stands.””
    2 later decisions 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.