Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 59 MICH 185 - Taft v. Taft

Taft v. Taft’s Empirical Analysis

1886

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
14
states following
November 2005
most recently cited

48 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently November 2005 · most notably Nolan v. Otney (1907), Davis v. Clark (1897)

48 state decisions — followed in 14 states

1601886189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Wheelwright v. Wheelwright · Prutsman v. Baker · Jackson ex dem. Russell v. Rowland · Cook v. Brown · Souverbye v. Arden

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

  1. ““In the present case there was nothing which would have justified the submission to the jury of the question of the delivery of the deed of 1878. The note, which was to be executed after Aden Taft’s [the grantor’s] death, was to be executed as a condition precedent to the transfer of the title. It was not executed earlier in fact, and the deed was never delivered earlier. Had Aden delivered it to defendant, to become operative afterwards on the performance of some condition, it might have presented a very different appearance. But the delivery was meant, to be, and was in fact, posthumous, and therefore void.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““ It was said in Foster v. Mansfield, 3 Metc. (Mass.) 412, that where a deed is deposited with a third person, and ‘ the future delivery is to depend upon the payment of money, or the performance of some other condition, it will be deemed an escrow. Where it is merely to await the lapse of time, or the happening of some contingency, and not the performance of any condition, it will be deemed the grantor’s deed presently. Still it will not take effect as a deed until the second delivery; but, when thus delivered, it will take effect by relation, from the first delivery.’””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “performance of the condition must be absolute and accurate, and cannot be dispensed with on any otherwise substantial performance.”
    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.