Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 619 A2D 1199 - Stuart v. Clarke

Stuart v. Clarke’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
3
states following
December 2011
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2011

4 state decisions

20199320002010decided

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 Paul v. Kennedy · 35 Wash. 2d 903 - Lechner v. Halling · 123 So. 2d 256 - Cradock v. Cooper · 94 N.J. Super. 300 - Zaremba v. Konopka · Ferguson v. Caspar

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

  1. “[T]his case is distinguishable from other, more typical escrow situations because the title to the property has passed to the buyer, and thus the proceeds of the sale — including the amount retained in escrow — have passed to the seller, subject to his performance of a condition subsequent entitling him to release of the escrowed funds. The buyers cannot logically be the owners of both the purchased property and the portion of the money in escrow.”
    2 later decisions 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.