Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 68 N.M. 239 - Bogle v. Potter

Bogle v. Potter’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
1
states following
October 2010
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently October 2010 · most notably Michael v. Bauman (1966), Navajo Tribe of Indians v. Hanosh Chevrolet-Buick, Inc. (1988)

50 state decisions

300196119701980199020002010decided

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 United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Arias v. Springer · Sundt v. Tobin Quarries, Inc. · Mary G. Roebling v. Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury

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

  1. ““1. Motion for judgment was filed in this cause, based upon the offer and acceptance of a compromise of said two suits, although filed only in Cause No.-21681. Before the filing of said motion the Court had heard all the testimony in said two causes as consolidated suit, and had announced in substance the following: “ T feel that I should make this tentative finding, which goes to the heart of the two cases. I will tentatively find that this entire line of business transactions between these parties was induced by a promise of marriage- and that the transactions from the time of the inception of the partnership to the time that the sons engaged counsel to file this law suit, was tainted with fraud.’ “2. The above two suits each presented controversial questions of fact and law which were yet to be determined by the Court from the evidence, when on April 18, 1958, the defendants through their attorneys of record made an offer in writing to compromise the two cases, which offer of compromise was in words and figures, as follows, to-wit: “‘April 18, 1958 “ ‘Judge C. R. Brice “ ‘Roswell, New Mexico “ ‘Dear Judge Brice: “ ‘At the direction of our client, Mr. Bean and the writer make the following proposal for the complete settlement of the Potter Company and Bogle cases against him. “ ‘Mr. Potter, subject to the approval of Bassett, Johnson & Deason, accountants, as to freedom from tax liability, will assign and transfer all of the common stock now standing of record in his name i”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.