Killinger v. Iest’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently July 2006
16 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 Hayward v. Yost · Coe v. Esau · Shaver v. Bell · Lois Grunow Memorial Clinic v. Davis · Parker v. Otis
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““While an agency relation cannot be proved by the extra-judicial statements and declarations of one purporting to act as agent, the fact of agency, when it rests in a parol agreement, may be established at trial by the testimony of the agent himself. The agent’s extra-judicial statements are mere hearsay, but at trial the agent’s testimony concerns his relationship to the alleged principal. The relationship being in issue and the witness being subject to cross-examination, the agent’s testimony cannot be termed hearsay. (Citations omitted).” 91 Idaho 576 , 428 P.2d at 495 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““A party entering into a contract in his self-assumed capacity as agent, with no actual authority from the purported principal, or in excess of an existing authority, is personally liable to the other contracting party . . . The liability terminates only if the purported principal is estopped to deny the authority . . . .” Killinger v. Iest, 91 Idaho 571, 576 , 428 P.2d 490, 495 (1967) (emphasis added).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“accrue directly to the principal as the proximate result of the unauthorized transaction in order to constitute ratification by the principal. (Emphasis supplied.) Killinger v. Iest, 91 Idaho 571, 576 , 428 P.2d 490, 495 (1967).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.