Peckham v. Balch’s Empirical Analysis
1882
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1925
8 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
Relies on Bomier v. Caldwell
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The mere payment of consideration by the purchaser which is susceptible of being compensated by damages, is not sufficient to take the case out of the statute.” Grindling v. Rehyl, 149 Mich. 641 (15 L. R. A. [N. S.] 466). “It is not payment alone that will take a case out of the statute, but this with possession, and acts done as owner in reliance thereon, that cannot ordinarily be compensated in damages, which entitles a party to an enforcement of a verbal agreement relating to the sale of lands.” Peckham v. Balch, 49 Mich. 179 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Weiland v. Stielau
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.