Henry v. Hope’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 2004
6 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 Jesse French Piano & Organ Co. v. Bodovitz · MacKin v. Darrow Music Co. · Edwards v. City Nat. Bank of McAlester · Klaus v. Fleming · Mid-West Chevrolet Corp. v. Noah
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Even if this $50 per month is construed to be the consideration for the execution of the third lease, the result would be no different. Where, in a contract, the statement of the consideration is a mere recital amounting to only a receipt and is not contractual in form, parol evidence is admissible to prove the true consideration. Clarke v. Clarke, 194 Okl. 455 , 152 P.2d 908 . For an excellent discussion of the rule and its application, see Wigmore on Evidence, 3rd Ed., § 2400 et seq., especially § 2430 et seq., on ‘Partial Integration.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Harris v. Snell
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.