Crimmins v. Lowry’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently October 2013 · most notably 107 N.C. App. 53 - Branch Banking and Trust Co. v. Thompson (1992), Horizon/CMS Healthcare Corporation v. Auld (2000)
6 federal appellate · 43 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland))
Relationships
Relies on Fox v. Kroeger · State v. Dyer · 62 Ill. 2d 16 - Wohlhuter v. St. Charles Lumber & Fuel Co. · 158 W. Va. 170 - Peoples Bank of Point Pleasant v. Pied Piper Retreat, Inc. · Rushton v. UM & M. CREDIT CORPORATION
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The holder discharges any party to the instrument to the extent that without such party’s consent the holder (b) unjustifiably impairs any collateral for the instrument given by or on behalf of the party or any person against whom he has a right of recourse.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“A comaker occupies a hybrid status. A comaker is in the position of a surety to the extent that he promises to answer for the portion of the debt that benefited his fellow comaker but is not a surety for the portion of the debt for which he personally benefited.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Krumme v. Moody“but are available to any party who is in the position of a surety having a right of recourse either on the instrument or dehors it, including an accommodation maker or acceptor known to the holder to be so.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Schmuckie v. Alvey
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.