Oulton v. Savings Institution’s Empirical Analysis
84 U.S. 109 · 1872
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 2 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2019 · most notably Michigan Trust Co. v. Bronson (1923), Gamble v. Daniel (1930)
30 federal appellate · 2 district · 24 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 Warhus v. Bowery Savings Bank
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he term bank implies a place for the deposit of money, as that is the most obvious purpose of such an institution.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““1. . . . The usual attributes of the banking business are receiving deposits, making collections and loans, discounting commercial paper and issuing notes for circulation, . . . ‘having a place of business where credits are opened by the deposit or collection of money or currency, subject to be paid or remitted upon draft, check or order, or where money is advanced or loaned on stocks, bonds, bullion, bills of exchange or promissory notes, or where stocks, bonds, bullion, bills of exchange or promissory notes are received for discount or for sale’ . . . Strictly speaking the term ‘bank’ implies a place for the deposit of money, as that is the most obvious purpose of such an institution. ...””
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.