Dixon v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 2003
2 federal appellate · 13 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 Jacob & Youngs, Inc. v. Kent · Hulst v. Benevolent Hall Ass'n · Aldrich v. Wilmarth · Burgi v. Rudgers · Symms-Powers Co. v. Kennedy
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We have long recognized the rule of substantial performance of building contracts. We first stated the rule in Aldrich v. Wilmarth, 3 S.D. 523 , 54 N.W. 811 (1893): “But where the builders have in good faith Intended to and Have substantially complied with their contract, although there may be Slight defects caused by inadvertence or unintentional omissions, they may recover the contract price, less the damages sustained on account of such defects.” (Emphasis supplied). The other cases recognizing this doctrine are collected in Dixon v. Nelson, 79 S.D. 44, 48 , 107 N.W.2d 505, 507 (1961).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.