Paxson v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
61 F. 874 · 1894
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently May 1939 · most notably Coder v. Arts (1907), Illinois Trust & Savings Bank v. City of Arkansas City (1896)
29 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Tilghman v. Proctor · Kimberly v. Arms · Dickerson v. Colgrove · The President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States v. Dandridge · Furrer v. Ferris
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The cause was referred to a master to take testimony therein, and to report to this court his findings of fact, and his conclusions of law thereon. This he did, and the court, after a review of the evidence, concurred in his finding and conclusions. Clearly, then, they are to he taken as presumptively correct, and, unless some obvious error has intervened in the application of the law, or some serious or important mistake has been made in the consideration of the evidence, the decree should be permitted to stand.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It rests on the solid foundation of our common sense of justice, which revolts at the idea of rewarding the intentional or culpably negligent deceiver at the expense of the innocent purchaser who believed in him.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The estoppel here relied upon is known as an equitable estoppel, or estoppel in pais. The law upon the subject is well settled. The vital principle is that he who, by his language or conduct, leads another to do what he would not otherwise have done, shall not subject such person to loss or injury by disappointing the expectations upon .which he acted. Such a change of position is sternly forbidden. It involves fraud and falsehood, and the law abhors both. The remedy is so applied as to promote the ends of justice. It is available only for protection, and cannot be used as a weapon of assault. It accomplishes that which ought to he done between man and man, and is not permitted to go beyond this limit. It is akin to the principle involved in the limitation of actions, and does its work of justice and repose where the statute cannot he invoked.””
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.