Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 Fla. 956 - Edwards v. Lewis

Edwards v. Lewis’s Empirical Analysis

1929

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
May 1996
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1996 · most notably Dakin v. Bayly (1933), Motorcity of Jacksonville, Ltd. v. Southeast Bank N.A. (1996)

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 20 state decisions

20019291930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond v. Malloy · Morris Engel v. Edward R O'Malley F · Bank of the Republic v. Millard · Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Hanover State Bank · Montsdoca v. Highlands Bank & Trust 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““When a check, draft, note or other negotiable instrument is deposited in a bank for credit, or for collection, it shall be considered due diligence on the part of the bank in the collection of any check, draft, note or other negotiable instrument so deposited, to forward en route the same without delay in the usual commercial way in use according to the regular course of business of banks, and the maker, endorser, guarantor or surety of any check, draft, note or other negotiable instrument, so deposited, shall be liable to the bank until actual final payment is received, and when a bank receives for collection any check, draft, note or other negotiable instrument and forwards the same for collection, as herein provided, it shall only be liable after actual final payment is received by it, except in case of want of due diligence on its part as aforesaid. (Ch. 5951, June 8, 1909, No. 1.)” Sec. 4748, Rev. Gen. Stats., 1920; Section 6834, Comp. Gen. Laws, 1927.”
    2 later decisions 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.