Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 3 DELCH 189 - Godwin v. Collins

Godwin v. Collins’s Empirical Analysis

1868

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
5
states following
February 1962
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently February 1962 · most notably 52 Cal. App. 322 - Dillingham v. Dahlgren (1921), Klein v. Markarian (1917)

28 state decisions

5018681870188018901900191019201930194019501960decided

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 Willard v. Tayloe · Seymour v. Delancy · White v. Territory of Washington · Meeker v. Meeker · Campbell v. Spencer

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

  1. ““This, if true, would anrord only a precarious security, since the vendor’s lien does not follow land into the hands of a purchaser for value without notice. But whether what is known in England as the ‘ vendor’s lien,’ is recognized here, remains in doubt since the case of Budd v. Busti, in the court of errors and appeals. In that cáse, though the decision went upon other grounds, a majority of the judges expressed opinions decidedly adverse to the recognition in this state of a vendor’s lien for purchase money. The policy of our law is against liens not of record, and the necessity for the vendor’s lien is practically superseded by the long-settled and uniform habit of our people to take special securities for unpaid purchase money.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “acted under the contract and their interests have become so involved that they cannot be put in statu quo, the court, in order to prevent gross injustice, will complete the execution of the contract, making such equitable adjustment between the parties by way of compensation or indemnity as circumstances may admit of.”
    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.