Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 262 SW 168 - Clem v. Chapman

Clem v. Chapman’s Empirical Analysis

1924

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
5
states following
September 1983
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently September 1983

10 state decisions

601924193019401950196019701980decided

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 Vanderford v. Farmers' & Mechanics' National Bank · Bradley Engineering & Manufacturing Co. v. Heyburn · Cellers v. Meachem · Bay v. Shrader · Theopold v. Deike

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

  1. “Appellant [Clem] in his propositions assumes that he was a surety on the note and not a principal maker of the note. The facts found by the trial court do not state that he was a surety or so regarded by the bank.”
    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.