Darden v. Harrison’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 2006
4 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 Holland v. Nimitz · McKelvy v. Barber · Holland v. Nimitz · United Refrigerator Co. v. Applebaum · First National Bank v. Reed
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The essential element that the party claiming accommodation status must prove is that the party claimed to be accommodated received the signature of the surety for the sole purpose of obtaining credit thereby, under an agreement that the accommodated party is principally responsible for payment at maturity, or that the instrument was executed for a limited purpose.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(e) An accommodation party is not liable to the party accommodated, and if he pays the instrument has a right of recourse on the instrument against such party.”
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.