Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 38 ALA 527 - Warfield v. Campbell

Warfield v. Campbell’s Empirical Analysis

1863

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
4
states following
May 1935
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently May 1935 · most notably Central Railroad Banking Co of Georgia v. Pettus (1885), National Commercial Bank v. Miller & Co. (1884)

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 21 state decisions

12018631870188018901900191019201930decided

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 Denton v. Noyes · Andrews v. Morse · Nicoll v. Nicoll · Ex parte Kyle · Hill v. Brinkley

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

  1. ““Upon the question, whether the attorney’s lien is superior or subordinate to the defendant’s right of set-off, there was in England, and is in this country, a singular contrariety of decision. * * * It is not necessary that we should consider it in this case. The set-off [a judgment], as to which the controversy arises in this case, was acquired after the rendition of the judgment [carrying the attorney’s lien]. To such a set-off it is plain that the attorney’s lien must be superior, whatever may be the rule as to a set-off existing when the judgment is rendered. The authorities, which are above cited in this opinion, show that the attorney is regarded as an assignee of the judgment, at least at the date of its rendition, to the extent of his fees. Being an assignee at that date, he has an older equity than that acquired by a set-off of later acquisition; and the maxim, ‘Qui prior est in tempore potior est in jure,’ applies in his favor.””
    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.