Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 63 KAN 88 - Perry v. Horack

Perry v. Horack’s Empirical Analysis

1901

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
6
states following
February 1943
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently February 1943

1 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

7019011910192019301940decided

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 Waterson v. Kirkwood

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

  1. ““If payment had been made by one not obligated to pay the debt, there would be more reason to say that such payment did not keep the mortgage alive ; but here it was made, as we have seen, by one who owed the whole debt and who joined in a mortgage given to secure the whole debt. The children had not assumed any personal liability for the debt and had nothing to do with the matter of payments, but they took the land burdened with the mortgage, and so long as the statute of limitations does not run against the debt secured by the mortgage, it would seem that the mortgage itself might be foreclosed and the property soJd to pay the debt which the mortgage was given to sfwure. ( Waterson v. Kirkwood. 17 Kan. 9 ; Schmucker v. Sibert, 18 id. 104, 26 Am. Rep. 765 .) ‘Payment by Mrs. Horack kept the debt alive, and if we should treat these payments as for herself alone, the mortgage would still be enforceable. If she alone had made the note and the children had joined in a mortgage on their property to secure it, and the debt had been kept alive by payments of the maker, no one would contend that the mortgage would be barred as to the children or that it would be affected by their failure to make payments or otherwise acknowledge the existence of the debt. The children occupy no better position here and the life of the note and the mortgage no more depends upon their acts than in the case above supposed. “Considering the interest of the parties in the homestead, their relations to th”
    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.