Showman v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis
1891
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently February 1941
1 federal appellate · 8 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 Clemens v. Conrad · King v. Hubbell · Showman v. Lee
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If this had been the entire charge on the subject, it is undoubtedly open to misapprehension. We have no doubt a partial wrongful purpose may be such as to stand in the way of such a security; but the court, in giving further instructions, put it beyond any doubt that there was no erroneous conclusion justifiable under the .whole charge. It was clearly and distinctly laid down that honesty on the part of one of the mortgagees would not save the instrument, if there was any wrong or fraud on the other, and the jury, by special findings, made the instruction unimportant. 'They found that neither of the mortgagees took the mortgage with any unlawful intent. And, further, they found that the debts intended to be secured were somewhat larger at the date of the mortgage than the whole sum secured, which was $5,000. A mortgage taken without fraudulent intent, to secure no more than the actual debt of the mortgagee, is not open to an attack as fraudulent.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Tefft v. Stern““To say that a party who assumes a liability may take a mortgage in excess of the amount necessary for his security, for the purpose of hiding the debtor’s interest from other creditors, and, when the fraud is exposed, may have the benefit of the mortgage to protect himself, would open the door to gross abuses.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Patrick v. Riggs
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.