Seymour v. Freer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

33 federal appellate · 5 district · 28 state decisions

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

1. ““We tliink Seymour took the legal title in trust for the purposes specified. A trust is where there are rights, titles, and interests in property distinct from the' legal ownership. In such cases, the legal title, in the eye of the law, carries with it, to the holder, absolute dominion; but behind it lie beneficial rights and interests in the same property belonging to another. These rights, to the extent to which they exist, are a charge upon the property, and constitute an equity which a court of equity will protect and enforce whenever its aid for that purpose is properly invoked. Interests in real estate, purely contingent, may be made the subjects of contract and equitable cognizance, as between the proper parties. The object of the trust here -was to sell the property within the time limited, and, after deducting from the proceeds the outlay, with interest and taxes, to pay over to Price one-half of the residue. To this extent, Seymour was a trustee, and Price the cestui que trust. They had a joint interest in the property. Seymour held the legal title, but the rights of Price were as valid in equity as those of Seymour were at law. “If Seymour, -within the five years, had conveyed the property to one of his children, by way of advancement, or to a stranger, otherwise than upon a bona fide sale for its fair value, the grantee would have taken the title subject to the trust upon which Seymour held it, and a court of equity would have followed the property -and dealt with”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. International Pavement Co. v. Richardson · Corbin v. Holmes

2. ““An action at law, sounding in damages, may undoubtedly be maintained in such cases for the breach of an express agreement by the trustees; but this in nowise affects the right to proceed in equity to enforce the trust and lien created by the contract. They are concurrent remedies. Either, which is preferred, may be selected. The remedy in equity is the better one. The right to resort to it, under the circumstances of this case, admits of no doubt, either upon principle or authority.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jones v. Patrick · A. Alex Shuford, Jr. v. Roy G. Anderson, and Currier & Carlsen, Incorporated, a Corporation

3. ““In May, 1835, an- agreement was entered into between Price and Seymour, which provided, on the part of Price, that he should devote his time and best judgment to the selection and purchase of land, to an amount not exceeding $5,000, in certain designated states and territories, or in such of them as he might find most advantageous to the interest of Seymour, that the purchases should he made during the then existing year, and that the contracts of purchase* should be made and the conveyances taken in the name of Seymour; and-ón the part of Seymour, that he should furnish the $5,000, that the lands purchased should be sold within five years afterwards, and that, of the profits-made by such purchase and sale, one-half should be paid to Price, and be in full for his services and expenses.” , ’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Atlantic Coast Realty Co. v. Robertson