Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 72 U.S. 497 - Hansbrough v. Peck

Hansbrough v. Peck’s Empirical Analysis

72 U.S. 497 · 1866

Citation profile

119
cited by 119 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
31
states following
October 2001
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 4 district · 101 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 119 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2001 · most notably Republic of France v. French Overseas Corporation the Malcolm Baxter Jr (1928), Vines v. Orchard Hills, Inc. (1980)

9 federal appellate · 4 district · 101 state decisions — followed in 31 states

300186618701880189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Noel v. Sale

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

  1. ““ . . . And no rule in respect to the contract is better settled than this: that the party who has advanced money, or done an act in part performance o.f the agreement, and then stojps short and refuses to proceed to its ultimate conclusion, the other party being ready and willing to proceed and fulfill all his stipulations according to the contract, will not be permitted to recover back what has thus been advanced or done. . . . ””
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““No rule in respect to tlie contract is better settled than this: That che party who has advanced money, or done an act in part performance of the agreement, and then stops short and refuses to proceed to its ultimate conclusion, 'the other parly being ready and willing to proceed, * * * according to the contract, will not be permitted to recover back what has been advanced or done. * * * We have thus gone carefully over the case as presented, and considered every ground set up on the part of the plaintiffs for ihe relief prayed for; but, with every disposition to temper the sternness of the law as applicable to them, we are compelled to say that, according to the settled principles both of law and equity, a case for relief has not been established. The truth of the case is that these plaintiffs improvidently entered into a purcliasé beyond their means, and, doubtless, relied very much upon the rise of the value óf the estate, and of the income, to meet the payments and expenditures laid out upon it. Their anticipations failed them, etc.””
    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.