Powers v. Andrews’s Empirical Analysis
1887
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently November 1984 · most notably Whiteman v. Taber (1919), Mallory v. Agee (1932)
2 federal appellate · 32 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 Mewburn's Heirs v. Bass · Cooper v. Hornsby · Otis v. McMillan & Sons · Hunt v. Acre · Childress v. Monette
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But this sale under the power as effectually cut off this equity of redemption, and destroyed all rights incident to it, as if there had been a strict foreclosure by judicial procedure in a court of chancery, and the junior mortgagee had been made a party to it. When a regular sale is made under a power contained in the instrument, not only the mortgagor, but all persons claiming any interest in the equity of redemption by privity of estate with him, are considered as parties to the proceeding, and are precluded by it as fully as if they had been made parties defendant by regular subpoena in an ordinary foreclosure suit. Childress v. Monette, 54 Ala. 317 . The sale, in other words, destroys the equity of redemption, and in this state transmutes it into a naked statutory right of redemption, limited to two years, with new incidents, privileges and liabilities, which are particularly set -forth in the statute.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Vines v. Wilcutt““It necessarily follows from these principles, which are now too well settled to be disturbed, that the statutory right of redemption can only be exercised by the persons named in the statute, in the mode, within the time and upon the . conditions there prescribed; although in construing the statute it must be interpreted liberally in favor of the debtor to prevent the oppressive sacrifice of his estate.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McDuffie v. Faulk““I prefer to hold that the incident follows the principal, the ownership, whithersoever it may go; and that whoever owns the equity of redemption, or title, as the case may be, at the time of foreclosure or sale, has the statutory right to redeem, as an incident of that ownership.””
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.