Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 43 CALAPP2D 356 - Ingalls v. Bell

Ingalls v. Bell’s Empirical Analysis

1941

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
3
states following
February 1987
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently February 1987

1 federal appellate · 17 state decisions

6019411950196019701980decided

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 Glock v. Howard & Wilson Colony Co. · Boone v. Templeman · Sather Banking Co. v. Arthur R. Briggs Co. · Hoppin v. Munsey · Wilcoxson v. Stitt

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

  1. ““The legislature in 1939, abolished all distinction between sureties and guarantors (see. 2787, Civ. Code) and a surety who has assumed liability for payment to a creditor is liable immediately upon the default of the principal and without demand or notice (sec. 2807, Civ. Code) and a surety may now, under section 2845 of the Civil Code, require his creditor to proceed against the principal, or to pursue any other remedy in his power which the surety cannot himself pursue, and which would lighten his burden; and if in such case the creditor neglects to do so the surety is exonerated to the extent to which he is thereby prejudiced.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “There was, prior to the amendment of Civil Code sections 2789 et seq., a marked difference between a contract of guaranty and one of indemnity. In a guaranty of payment the liability was fixed by the failure of the principal debtor to pay at maturity or at the time when ■ payment was guaranteed. It was immaterial whether the debtor could or could not pay the debt.”
    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.