Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 81 MD 476 - Cole v. Hines

Cole v. Hines’s Empirical Analysis

1895

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
9
states following
October 1976
most recently cited

24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently October 1976

24 state decisions

60189519001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Black v. Woodrow · Hutchings v. . Munger · Johnston v. Whittemore · Maryland Fertilizing & Manufacturing Co. v. Lorentz · Wheeler & Wilson Manufacturing Co. v. Teetzlaff

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

  1. ““In all contracts where time is of the essence, a breach of the contract in that respect by one of the parties may be waived by the other party’s subsequently treating the contract as still in force. [Citing authorities.] In these cases of conditional sales, the acceptance by the seller of an instalment of the purchase money after default is a recognition of the contract as still subsisting, and a waiver of the forfeiture. [Citing authorities.] And other acts than acceptance may have the same effect. “A party cannot take two inconsistent positions. If he has a right either to rescind a contract on account of a breach by the other party or to continue it in force, and he elects to continue it in force, he thereby abandons the right to rescind, and is bound by the election so made. [Citing authorities.] * * * “In such cases of a waiver of a forfeiture, or of a right to rescind a contract, there is no necessity for a consideration, but the question turns rather upon the principle of election be tween two inconsistent rights. [Citing authorities.]” Id. at 479-80 . * * * “* * * He made his election to continue the contract in force by his notification to the appellant, who had a right to rely upon it, and having thus waived the forfeiture on account of this particular default, it follows that he could not subsequently insist upon it.” Id. at 482 .”
    1 later decision 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.