Fish v. Benson’s Empirical Analysis
1886
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently November 2006 · most notably Philpott v. Superior Court (1934), Mathews v. Sniggs (1919)
1 federal appellate · 48 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.
Relationships
Relies on Allore v. Jewell · Koppikus v. State Capitol Comm'rs · Lestrade v. Barth · Nash v. Harris · Weber v. Marshall
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Both courts of law and of equity in proper cases have jurisdiction in eases of fraud, and when the facts constituting the fraud and the relief sought are such as are cognizable in a court of law, the parties are entitled to a jury trial; but where the case as made by the pleadings involves the application of the doctrines of equity and the granting of relief, which can be obtained in a court of equity, and not elsewhere, the parties are not entitled to a jury trial. ’ ’”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Holt v. Parmer““ ‘ Where a conveyance has been obtained by the grantee’s fraud, so that it would be set aside at the suit of the defrauded grantor, but the fraudulent grantee has in turn conveyed to a bona fide purchaser for value, and without notice, the latter will take and hold the property free from all these equities, protected against the equitable remedies of the original defrauded owner. ’ ””
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.