Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 68 KAN 598 - Kimmel v. Bean

Kimmel v. Bean’s Empirical Analysis

1904

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
11
states following
April 2001
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently April 2001 · most notably Iola State Bank v. Bolan (1984), Batson v. Alexander City Bank (1912)

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 21 state decisions — followed in 11 states

10019041910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 National Bank v. Insurance Co. · Union Stock-Yards Nat Bank v. Gillespie · Cook v. Tullis · The "S. S. Osborne" · Van Alen v. . American National Bank

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

  1. ““ ‘If a trustee or other fiduciary person, in violation of his own duty, uses trust money to pay an antecedent debt of his own to a creditor who has no notice of the breach of trust, or that the money is subject to the trust, in such a manner that the money is received as a general payment, and not as a distinct and separate fund, then the money becomes free from the trust, and cannot be followed by the beneficiary into the hands of the creditor, although, in general, an antecedent debt does not constitute a valuable consideration.’ (Pom. Eq. Jur. 2d ed., § 1048.)” Kimmel v. Bean, 68 Kan. at 606 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It is said that the case is to be governed by the doctrine established in this State that an antecedent debt is not such a consideration as will cut off the equities of third parties in respect of negotiable securities obtained by fraud. But no case has been referred to where this doctrine has been applied to money received in good faith in payment of a debt.” (Stephens v. Board of Education, 79 N. Y. 183, 187 .)”
    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.