Smith v. Foxworthy’s Empirical Analysis
1894
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 1910
9 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.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Appraisers of property about to be sold under execution act judicially, and the value fixed by them on property appraised can only be assailed for fraud. Inadequacy of the appraised value, alone, is not sufficient cause for setting aside a sale, in the absence of fraud. To justify the vacation of a sale on the ground that the appraisement was too low, the actual value of the property must so greatly exceed its appraised value as to raise a presumption of fraud. All the affidavits filed in this case on the question of the value of the property were immaterial. There was no averment, in the motion to set the sale aside, of any fraudulent conduct on the part of the appraisers in making this appraisement, nor averment of any fraud or unfair means resorted to by the appraisers at the sale, or other party to the suit, conducing to the making of this appraisement. No facts were stated in the affidavits showing any fraudulent conduct on the part of any one in the making of the appraisement, nor can any such inference be drawn from the facts stated. The appraisement is assailed for error of judgment upon the part of the appraisers, and this furnishes no ground for setting the sale aside.””
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.