Storm v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

64 federal appellate · 7 district · 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 134 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Where the defendant has actually received the consideration of a written agreement, it is no answer to an action brought against him for a breach of his covenants in the same to say, that the agreement did not bind the plaintiff to. perform the promises on his part therein contained, provided it appears that the promises in question, have, in fact, been performed in good faith, and without prejudice to the defendant.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Mann v. Cherry, Bekaert and Holland · Livingston v. Blair

2. ““Such a defence could not be sustained, even if the action was upon a simple contract; but the agreement here is under seal, and the action is an action of debt founded on the bond given to secure the performance of the agreement; and it is an elementary rule, that a bond or other specialty is presumed to have been made upon good consideration, so long as the instrument remains unimpeached. Taylor, Evid. (6th ed.) 103; Lowe v. Peers, 4 Burr. 2225; Dorr v. Munsell, 13 Johns. 431 . “Want of consideration is not a sufficient answer to an action on a sealed instrument. The seal imports a consideration, or renders proof of consideration unnecessary; because the instrument binds the parties by force of the natural presumption that an instrument executed with so much deliberation and solemnity is founded upon some sufficient cause. Parker v. Parmele, 20 Johns. 134 ; 1 Smith, Lead. Cas. (7th Am. ed.), 698 ;1 Chitty on Contr. (11th Am. ed.) 20; Paige v. Parker, 8 Gray 213 ; Wing v. Chase, 35 Me. 265 ; 2 Bl. Com. 446; Fallowes v. Taylor, 7 Term. 473.”.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Monro v. National Surety Co.

3. ““Beyond doubt the written agreement went into operation, and it is not even suggested that department and division commanders ever expressed any disapproval of its terms and condition. * * * Suppose it be true that the quartermaster general might terminate it, if he should see lit. It is a sufficient answer to the suggestion to say that he never did interfere in the matter, and that the contract continued in full force and operation throughout the whole period for which the necessary supplies were purchased by the United States in open market — ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Park Bros. & Co. v. Kelly Axe Manuf'g Co.