Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 274 F.1d 918 - McNaught v. Hoffman

McNaught v. Hoffman’s Empirical Analysis

274 F. 918 · 1921

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
June 1930
most recently cited

2 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Relies on Steele v. Clark · Tatem v. Eglanol Mining Co. · Smith v. Hoffman · McDonald v. American National Bank · Marston v. Humphrey

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

  1. “"To come within the meaning and scope of the section, the (executory) contract made expressly for the benefit of a third person must be one whereby the promisor undertakes to pay or discharge some debt or duty which the promisee owes to the third person; in other words, the third person must sustain such a relation to the contracting parties that a consideration may be deemed to have passed from him to the promisee which raises the implication of a promise from the promisor directly to himself. There must be a consideration passing from the third person, by virtue of which he may assert the existence of a promise in his favor.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “"It may be conceded that the rule so established in Montana as to the rights of third persons for whose benefit contracts have been made is opposed to the weight of modern authority. 6 R. C. L. 884; 13 C. J. 705. But it rests upon the construction of a state statute, and it is binding upon this court.””
    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.