Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 67 KAN 194 - Harrison v. Henderson

Harrison v. Henderson’s Empirical Analysis

1903

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
8
states following
November 1975
most recently cited

31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently November 1975 · most notably Ex Parte Southern Cotton Oil Co. (1922), Prather v. Colorado Oil & Gas Corp. (1975)

31 state decisions

9019031910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Pottlitzer v. Wesson · Brigham v. Dana · 49 Mo. App. 556 - Perkins v. Headley · Beckman v. Birchard, Bridge & Co. · Kingsville Preserving Co. v. Frank

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

  1. ““An accord and satisfaction is the result of an agreement between the parties, and, like all other agreements, must be consummated by a meeting of the minds of the parties, accompanied by a sufficient consideration. If the creditor is to be held to abate his claim against the debtor, it must be shown that he understood that he was doing so when he received the claimed consideration therefor. A simple tender of a ‘balance’ as shown by an account tendered by the debtor does not carry with it an implication or conclusion that by such tender the debtor paid, or that the creditor agreed to receive, the same in full of the amount due, where there has been no prior disagreement or discussion as to what was actually due.” [Emphasis supplied.]”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““A sum of money paid and received will not operate as a full settlement although the payer so intended it, and would not have paid it if he'had net understood that such would be its effect, but in reference to which he made no such express condition, if the payee did not so understand it, and would not have received it upon such an understanding.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Where a controversy as to the amount of the indebtedness exists between a creditor and his debtor, and the debtor tenders to the creditor the amount which he claims is due on condition that the acceptance of it should discharge the entire demand, the' acceptance will constitute an accord and satisfaction as a matter of law, since one who accepts a conditional tender assents to the condition.””
    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.