Murray v. Nickerson’s Empirical Analysis
1903
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 1956
6 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 Joslyn v. Schwend · O'Dea v. City of Winona · Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. v. Chisholm · Lamprey v. St. Paul & Chicago Railway Co. · Lamprey v. St. Paul & Chicago Railway Co.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The tenders of the amount due on the land by virtue of the contract, and the refusal of the tenders, put the vendor in default, and it was not necessary for the plaintiffs to bring the money into court. All they were required to do after the tenders were refused, and their rights in the land fixed thereby, was to be ready and willing to pay when advised that the tenders would be accepted. It is enough that they were ready and willing to perform, and tendered performance in their complaint.” (Citing cases.) (Italics supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gassert v. Anderson
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.