Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 62 U.S. 414 - The White Water Valley Canal Company v. Henry Vallette

The White Water Valley Canal Company v. Henry Vallette’s Empirical Analysis

62 U.S. 414 · 1858

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
October 1952
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1952 · most notably Jones v. Guaranty and Indemnity Company (1879), Christian v. Atlantic N C R (1890)

9 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions

6018581860187018801890190019101920193019401950decided

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 Pierce v. Emery · Seymour & Brown v. Canandaigua & Niagara Falls Rail Road · Steam Navigation Co. v. Weed · Beers v. Phœnix Glass Co.

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

  1. “"In the absence of objections to the validity of these bonds, there can he no question concerning their legal operation and effect, or of the jurisdiction of a court of equity to enforce them. That court treats an agreement for a mortgage or pledge of bonds or oilier property as binding, and will give it effect according to the intention of the contracting parties.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Where there is a loan, although the profit derived to the lender exceeds the legal rate, yet if that profit is contingent or uncertain, the contract, if bona -fide and without any design to evade the statute, is not usurious.””
    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.