Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 34 U.S. 378 - Bank of United States v. Waggener

Bank of United States v. Waggener’s Empirical Analysis

34 U.S. 378 · 1835

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
16
states following
July 1990
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 4 district · 39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1990 · most notably The President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States v. William Owens (1829), Hotel Company v. Wade (1877)

14 federal appellate · 4 district · 39 state decisions — followed in 16 states

14018351840185018601870188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Fleckner v. President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States · The President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States v. William Owens

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

  1. ““When the contract on its face is for legal interest only, then dt must be proved that there was some corrupt agreement, or device or shift, to cover usury, and that it was in the full contemplation of the parties.””
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““If it be the real intention of the parties to receive or reserve a given rate of interest, and that rate turns out to be usurious, the transaction will be re garded as usury, whether the parties knew the interest to be usurious or not. * * No error of the parties, as to the effect of the transaction under the law, can give validity to a contract made in violation of the law.” Tyler on Usury, p. 104.”
    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.