Clarendon County v. Curtis’s Empirical Analysis
46 F.2d 888 · 1931
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 1975
4 federal appellate · 2 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.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 41
Relies on Blair v. City of Chicago · Holmes v. Goldsmith · Ketchum v. Duncan · United States Trask v. Wanamaker · Kirven v. Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The only question for the jury to consider in this case was whether the notes in question had been paid and the obligation thereon extinguished, or whether Curtis Sanger, the plaintiffs, instead of paying them and extinguishing them, took them over and acquired title thereto by purchase and sale from the Bankers' Trust Company, who held them for the Norfolk Western Railroad Company. That was the sole question at issue.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Even if the notes were non-negotiable, the plaintiffs as original beneficial holders were entitled to have them performed according to their tenor, which meant the payment *Page 120 of $34,117.00, plus interest, at Equitable Trust Company in the City of New York June 7, 1926.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“well knew the notes became due June 7, 1926, that the Bank of Manning did not have the notes, and that they were made payable at the Equitable Trust Company in New York City,”
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.