Hill v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis
1912
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1987 · most notably May v. Henderson (1925), In Re Fulper (1926)
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 20 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 Baker v. Wood · Manning v. Manning · Mason v. Martin · Cheever v. Ellis · Sherman v. White
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is a fundamental part of the doctrine of equitable estoppels that the estoppel extends only so far as may be necessary to protect from loss the party entitled to assert it. He may claim indemnification, but not profit.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Quirk v. Bedal
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.