Alexander v. Barker’s Empirical Analysis
1902
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently March 1996
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 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 Andrews v. Pond · Rue v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co. · McAllister v. Smith · M. W. Kerwin & Co. v. Doran · Alexandria, Arcadia & Fort Smith Railroad v. Johnson
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The rule is that when persons enter into an illegal contract, and one of them receives the profits or other advantages arising therefrom, the courts will not compel him to account therefor, as in such case the right of the other to a share therein, or to the whole of it, if such were the agreement, would have to be based upon the illegal contract, and to permit him to recover it would be, in reality, an enforcement of the illegal scheme. The law therefore leaves him where it finds him.” (p. 402.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Danciger v. Cooley
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.