Scott v. Paisley’s Empirical Analysis
271 U.S. 632 · 1926
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 10 district · 33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 88 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2015 · most notably Security Mortgage Co. v. Powers (1928), Northrip v. Federal National Mortgage Ass'n (1975)
28 federal appellate · 10 district · 33 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 Bell Silver Copper Min Co v. First Nat Bank of Butte · Hardwicke v. Hamilton · Atkinson v. Washington & Jefferson College · Watkins v. Booth
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 88 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(t)he validity of such a contractual power of sale is unquestionable.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The case is in a narrow compass. That, under the Georgia decisions, a sale made under a prior security deed in conformity to the provisions of § 6307, devests a purchaser from the grantor of all rights in the land, is conceded. The contention that this section is unconstitutional, as applied to such a purchaser, rests, in its last analysis, upon the claim that he is entitled, as a matter of right, in accordance with settled usage and established principles of law, to notice of a proceeding to sell the land under the prior security deed and opportunity to make defense therein. We cannot sustain this contention. “Here the holder of the secured debt was also the holder of the legal title to the property by which it was secured. In such case, at least, § 6037 authorizes the holder of the secured debt, by following the procedure outlined by the statute, to bring the property to sale in satisfaction of the debt. Its effect is no more than if it conferred upon the holder of the secured debt a statutory power of sale, which may be treated as equivalent, insofar as the constitutional question is concerned, to an express power of sale in a mortgage or trust deed.” (p. 1125.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.