Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 54 MINN 1 - Dunning v. McDonald

Dunning v. McDonald’s Empirical Analysis

1893

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
3
states following
January 1937
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently January 1937

8 state decisions

4018931900191019201930decided

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 Bottineau v. Ætna Life Insurance · Niles v. Ransford

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

  1. ““The statute contemplates that it shall he exercised by the person or persons in whom it resides,— that is, by the holder or holders of the legal title to the mortgage, Bottineau, v. Ætna Life Ins. Co., 31 Minn. 125 ( 16 N. W. 849 ), — provided he or they be qualified to exercise it, by his or their title having been made matter of record; and if there be an assignment of a part interest to one whose assignment is not of record, as he cannot exercise it, and the joining of his name to the foreclosure proceeding can add nothing to it, his name need not be joined, but the power must be exercised by the owner of the remaining interest, who is qualified by his title appearing of record. That is, in the case of an assignment, the power is not to be deemed as fully vested in the assignee, so that he may foreclose, or so that he must join with the others in foreclosing, until his assignment is recorded.””
    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.