James v. Brainard-Jackson & Co.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

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

1. ““An installment of interest was overdue on the mortgage, and by the express terms thereof, the holder was, for that reason, empowered to declare the whole sum due and payable. To entitle him to- exercise the option it is enough that he give the maker of the notes an opportunity to pay when due. This the holder did by notifying the maker that he was the holder of the note and that the interest could be paid to him at a place stated in the city where the note was payable. He was not obligated to go to the maker and make a formal demand^ and such is not the holding in the case of Bardsley v. Washington Mill Co., 54 Wash. 553 , 103 Pac. 822 , 132 Am. St. 1133. In that case the maker was able and willing to pay the interest, but no opportunity was given him to do so at the place where the nóte was payable’; it having been assigned by the payee and held by a bank in a state, other than the one in. which the note was payable. It was held that the payor was not obligated to tender payment outside of tbe place where the note was payable.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hartge v. Capeloto