Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 96 KAN 269 - Cheever v. Kelly

Cheever v. Kelly’s Empirical Analysis

1915

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
3
states following
June 1984
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently June 1984

16 state decisions

6019151920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Bleakley v. Barclay · Electric Plaster Co. v. Blue Rapids City Township · McCormick v. McCormick · Riggs v. Riggs · Miller v. Miller

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.

  1. ““Expenditures of this character cannot be recovered in a simple action of debt, because the propriety of all such expenditures depends upon a variety of considerations. The action must in the nature of things be equitable in character. (Riggs v. Riggs, 91 Kan. 593 , 138 Pac. 628 .) But the fact that such expenditures must be reasonable and just under all the circumstances, to authorize recovery, does not permit recovery of what would be a reasonable sum if it had been advanced, but which was not advanced.” (p. 270.)”
    1 later decision 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.