Edwards v. Hartshorn’s Empirical Analysis
1905
Citation profile
1 district · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently June 1987
1 district · 17 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 Martinsburg Co v. March · Chicago Co v. Price · McCoy v. Able · Williams v. Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co. · Kistler v. Indianapolis & St. Louis Railroad
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Of course, if there were fraud, gross mistake, or the failure to exercise an honest judgment by the umpire, his estimate or award would not be binding.” (p. 24.)”
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.