Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 60 U.S. 390 - George Bulkley v. Christian Honold

George Bulkley v. Christian Honold’s Empirical Analysis

60 U.S. 390 · 1856

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
December 1975
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 5 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1975 · most notably Mackenzie v. Hare (1915), Stewart & Co. v. Rivara (1927)

6 federal appellate · 5 district · 10 state decisions

1001856186018701880189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 James Bell v. Matthias Bruen

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

  1. “"The law of Louisiana imposes on the seller the obligation of warranting the thing sold against its hidden defects. (Civ.Code, arts. 2,450, 2,451.) Hidden defects are those which could not be discovered by simple inspection. (Civ.Code, art. 2,497.). In case the vendee desires to rescind the contract by reason of the breach of such warranty, he may do so by an action of redhibition. But he may also retain the thing sold, and have an action for reduction of the price by reason of the difference in value between the thing as warranted and as it was in fact. (Civ.Code, arts. 2,519, 2,520.). And in this action only such a part of the price as will indemnify the vendee for the difference between the value of the thing as warranted and the thing actually sold, together with the expenses incurred on the thing after deducting its fruits, can be recovered."”
    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.