Marble Company v. Ripley’s Empirical Analysis
77 U.S. 339 · 1870
Citation profile
104 federal appellate · 39 district · 128 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 355 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2010 · most notably Virginian Ry Co v. System Federation No 40 (1937), International Union, United Mine Workers v. Bagwell (1994)
104 federal appellate · 39 district · 128 state decisions — followed in 31 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.
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 355 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Another serious objection to a decree for a specific performance is found in the peculiar character of the contract itself, and in the duties which it requires of the owners of the quarries. These duties are -continuous. They involve skill, personal labor, and cultivated judgment. It is, in effect, a personal contract to deliver marble of certain kinds, and- in blocks of a kind, that the court is incapable of determining whether they accord with the contract or not. The agreement being- for a perpetual supply of ma.rble, no decree that the court can make will end the controversy.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Nor is it any reason for rescinding the contract that it has become more burdensome in its operation upon the complainants than was anticipated. If it be, indeed, unequal now, if it has become unconscionable, that might possibly be a reason why a court should refuse to decree its specific performance ; but it has nothing to do with the question whether it should be ordered to be canceled. It is not the province of a court of equity to undo a bargain because it is hard.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““That one party to an executory contract, partly executed, has violated his engagements, is generally no sufficient reason for a decree by a court of equity, at the suit of the other party, that the contract shall be annulled.””
2 later decisions 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.