Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 82 U.S. 165 - Duncan v. Jaudon

Duncan v. Jaudon’s Empirical Analysis

82 U.S. 165 · 1872

Citation profile

82
cited by 82 later decisions
10
cited 10 times by the Supreme Court
19
states following
November 1944
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 4 district · 36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 82 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1944 · most notably National Bank v. Insurance Co. (1881), Seminole Nation v. United States (1942)

13 federal appellate · 4 district · 36 state decisions — followed in 19 states

21018721880189019001910192019301940decided

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

  1. ““And the supreme court of Massachusetts in a recent ease, in its essential features like the'ease at bar, decides that, if a certificate of stock expressed in the name of A. B., trustee, is by him pledged to secure his own debt, the pledgee is, by the terms of the certificate, put upon inquiry as to the character and limitations of the trust, and, if he accepts the pledge without inquiry, does so at his peril. In that case the cestui que trust was not named in the certificate, and the court remarked that, if it were so, the duty of inquiry would hardly be controverted. If these propositions are sound, — and we entertain no doubt on the point, — the liability of the appellants for the conversion of the stock belonging to Mrs. Jaudon cannot be an open question.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “‘ ‘ 1. When the trustees under a will, in making investments, depart from the rule prescribed by the testator, the right of action of the cestui que trust for an illegal disposition of the property thus substituted is not affected by reason of this departure. “2. Where a trustee holding stock, declared on its face to be in trust for his cestui que trust, pledged the same for a loan of money to himself, the cestui que trust may compel the lender to pay the proceeds of such stock as pledged and sold by him. “3. The party taking such stock on pledge, deals with it at his peril; for there is no presumption of a right to sell it, as there is in the case of executor. “4. Notice of the trust communicated to the cashier of the lender when he received the stock binds the lender. ’ ’”
    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.