Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 56 NEB 446 - McCready v. Phillips

McCready v. Phillips’s Empirical Analysis

1898

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
3
states following
April 1999
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently April 1999

1 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

3018981900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Chicago, Texas & Mexican Central Railway Co. v. Titterington · Dowd v. Tucker · Johnson v. Gulick · Goodwin v. Horne · Ayres v. French

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

  1. ““This is not an action to rescind, but one-for damages. It ratifies the contract. Plaintiff is entitled to his damages on the basis of a contract performed. He cannot repudiate-it in part, and have his damages entire.””
    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.