Leo v. Pearce Stores Co.’s Empirical Analysis
54 F.2d 92 · 1931
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 1987
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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 Sturm v. Boker · Gardiner v. William S. Butler & Co. · William Filene's Sons Co. v. Weed · Pennsylvania Steel Co. v. New York City Ry. Co. · In re Mullings Clothing 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.
““There is no reference to any trust. There is no language indicating any intention that the money shall be kept as a separate fund or that its use by the defendant shall be restricted in any way. Indeed, such restriction is negatived by the provisions relative to interest.””
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.