Lemp v. Armengol’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 40 state decisions

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

1. “If the [original] petition was subject to exception, either general or special, for lack of an averment of notice to the guarantors, of Krempkau’s default, the defect was supplied by the allegations in the supplemental petition. These allegations would properly have appeared in an amended [original] petition, but, having been pleaded, they cannot be disregarded. The paper denominated a “Supplemental Petition” was not properly such, under the rules; and, upon a motion having been filed for that purpose, it should have been stricken out.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Sixth RMA Partners, L.P. v. Sibley

2. ““Know all men by these presents, that we, J. Armengol, Raymond Martin, and Fred Werner, of the county of Webb and state, of Texas, in consideration of goods sold and to be delivered to A. E. Krempkau, of the city of Laredo, by William J. Lemp, of the city of St. Louis, state of Missouri, do hereby guarantee full payment to said William J. Lemp of the value of all goods sold and delivered since the 1st day of March, 1889, or that may be hereafter sold and delivered to said Krempkau, not to exceed, however, the sum of $3,000.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Woelfel v. Rotan Grocery Co.

3. “the conversations which attend the negotiation may be looked to for the purpose of showing the nature of the contemplated transaction.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rigsby v. Boone County State Bank of Lebanon