Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 58 INDAPP 637 - Cable Co. v. McElhoe

Cable Co. v. McElhoe’s Empirical Analysis

1915

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
3
states following
May 2006
most recently cited

2 district · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently May 2006 · most notably 118 Ind. App. 156 - Nichols v. Bogda Motors, Inc. (1948), Atlas Securities Co. v. Grove (1922)

2 district · 27 state decisions

1501915192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Wayman v. Southard · Pritchard Ex'X v. Norton · Green v. Van Buskirk · Coghlan v. South Carolina Railroad · Van Winkle v. Crowell

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

  1. ““In the case at bar the situs of the involved property was in Illinois at the time of the execution of the contract; * * * the contract was executed in Illinois, and the vendor was domiciled there; * * * the contract was * * * executed in contemplation that Attica, Ind., should immediately become the situs of the property. * * * ‘Attica, Indiana’ * * * was named in the contract as the address of the vendee. * * * The contract recognized that the vendee was already, or at least soon to be, domiciled in Indiana, and consequently that lie should perform the conditions and covenants of the contract, * * * including the payment of the purchase money. * * * ””
    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.