James v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis
90 F.2d 910 · 1937
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently April 1987
12 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 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 Dickerson v. Colgrove · Gregg v. Von Phul · Eliason v. Wilborn · Waskey v. Chambers · McCall v. Porter
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) ignorance of the party claiming estoppel of the matter asserted; (b) silence concerning the matter asserted, where there is a duty to speak, thus amounting to a misrepresentation or concealment of a material fact; (c) action by the party relying on the misrepresentation or concealment ; (d) damage resulting if the estoppel is denied; (e) consistency in the party claiming estoppel.”
4 later decisions 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.