Wicker v. Hoppock’s Empirical Analysis
73 U.S. 94 · 1867
Citation profile
97 federal appellate · 26 district · 57 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 288 later decisions (25 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2019 · most notably Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody (1975), Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Boyd (1913)
97 federal appellate · 26 district · 57 state decisions — followed in 22 states
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 Bame v. Drew
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 288 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The injured party is to be placed, as near as may be, in the situation he would have occupied if the wrong had not been committed.”
26 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““If the contract in the case before us were one of indemnity, the argument of the counsel for the plaintiff in error would be conclusive. In that class of cases the obligee cannot recover until he has been actually damnified, and he can recover only to the extent of the injury he has sustained up to the time of the institution of the suit. But there is a well-settled distinction between an agreement to indemnify and an agreement to pay. In the latter ease a recovery may be had as soon as there is a breach of the contract, and the measure of the damages is the full amount agreed to be paid.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The validity of such an arrangement depends upon the intention by which the parties are animated and the object sought to be accomplished. If the object be fair — if there be no indirection — no purpose to prevent the competition of bidders, and such is not the necessary effect of the arrangement in a way contrary to public policy, the agreement is unobjectionable and will be sustained.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Taylor v. Lafevers
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.