State v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
2 district · 67 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably Chemtrol Adhesives, Inc. v. American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance (1989), Blue Cross v. Hrenko (1995)
2 district · 67 state decisions
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 Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Hensgen
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The doctrine of subrogation in its broadest sense is the substitution of one person for another with reference to a lawful claim or right, or the substitution of another person in the place of the creditor to whose rights he succeeds. * * * The general rule as to equitable subrogation is that `one who advances money to pay a prior lien, without discovering an intervening lien which a proper examination of the records would have disclosed, is not guilty of such negligence as will prevent his being subrogated to the prior lien as against the intervening lienor, especially where subrogation leaves the latter no worse off than he would have been had the prior lien not been paid.' 73 American Jurisprudence 2d 664, Subrogation, Section 104.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“The doctrine of subrogation in its broadest sense is the substitution of one person for another with reference to a lawful claim or right, or the substitution of another person in the place of the creditor to whose rights he succeeds. (Citations omitted). Here, it is my position that Cleveland Federal may not be subrogated to its own original rights. For purposes of *Page 16 subrogation, it may stand in the shoes of others, but not in its own original shoes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“I do not believe that equitable subrogation may be applied in the instance of Cleveland Federal having satisfied its own prior secured debt with the proceeds of the latter secured loan.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.