Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 37 Ark. 47 - Shields v. Smith

Shields v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1881

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
3
states following
May 1951
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently May 1951

1 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

4018811890190019101920193019401950decided

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.

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

  1. ““Tbe doctrine of estoppel is applied with respect to the representations of a party, to prevent tbeir operating as a fraud upon one who has been led to rely upon them. They would have that, effect if a party, who by his statements as to matters, of fact or as to his intended abandonment of exist-, ing rights, had designedly induced another to change his conduct or alter his condition upon reliance upon them, could be permitted to deny the truth' of his statements or enforce his rights, against his declared intention to abandon them.””
    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.