Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 56 CAL 307 - Holmes v. Richet

Holmes v. Richet’s Empirical Analysis

1880

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
17
states following
May 2004
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 54 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently May 2004 · most notably 6 Cal. App. 4th 1233 - Halbert's Lumber, Inc. v. Lucky Stores, Inc. (1992), McDougald v. Hulet (1901)

1 federal appellate · 54 state decisions — followed in 17 states

1401880189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 President of Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. v. Pennsylvania Coal Co. · Hudson v. McCartney · Herrick v. Estate of Belknap · Bottomly v. Rector · Houghton v. Blake

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

  1. ““In case any difference of opinion shall arise between the parties to this contract in relation to the contract, the work to be or that has been performed under it, such difference shall be settled by arbitration by two competent persons, one employed by each party to the contract, and these two shall have the power to name an uninterested umpire whose decision shall be binding on all parties to the contract.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““An agreement to refer a case to arbitration will not be regarded by the courts, and they will take jurisdiction and determine a dispute between parties, notwithstanding such agreement.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “But nothing prevents parties from ascertaining and constituting as they please the cause of action which is to become the subject-matter of decision by the courts.”
    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.