Williams v. Morris’s Empirical Analysis
95 U.S. 444 · 1877
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 7 district · 75 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 145 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2021 · most notably Scott v. Donald (1897), Bibb v. Allen (1893)
36 federal appellate · 7 district · 75 state decisions — followed in 26 states
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 Twin-Lick Oil Company v. Marbury · Badger v. Badger · Marsh v. Whitmore · Purcell v. Miner
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 145 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In some jurisdictions it is held that the acts relied on as part performance are sufficient to take the ease out of the statute Of frauds, if they are unequivocally and in their own nature referable to some such agreement as that alleged. Many courts declare a stricter rule, however, holding that the party seeking aid must show by clear and satisfactory proof the existence of the contract as laid in his pleading, and that the acts of part performance must.be of this identical contract. It is not enough, say these courts, that the acts of. part performance evidence some indefinite agreement. They must be unequivocal and satisfactory evidence of the particular agreement pleaded and proved.” Hammon on Contracts, 615.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Decided cases everywhere require that the memorandum should mention the price. * * * Unless the essential terms of the- sale can be ascertained from the writing itself, or by reference in it to something else, the writing is not a compliance with the statute; and, if the agreement be thus defective, it cannot be supplied by parol proof, for that would at once introduce all the mischiefs which the statute was intended to prevent.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The ground upon which such yerbal sales are enforced, notwithstanding the statute, is the prevention of fraud. (Ann. Berta Lodge v. Leverton) 42 Tex. 31 , supra. The rule is thus by Justice Clifford in a recent case: ‘Where one of the two contracting parties has been induced or allowed to alter his position on the faith of such contract to such an extent that it would be fraud on the part of the other .party to set up its invalidity, courts, of equity hold that the clear proof of the contract and of the acts of part performance will take the case out of the operation of the statute, if the acts of part performance were already such as to show that they are properly referable to the parol agreement.’ Williams v. Morris, 5 Otto (95 U. S.) 457, 24 L. Ed. 360 . “The change of circumstances growing out of valuable improvements has been assumed to be such as to make it difficult or'impossible to restore the vendee to his position.””
2 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.