Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1 Backes 157 - Schultz v. Pollock

Schultz v. Pollock’s Empirical Analysis

1928

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
February 1960
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 1960

7 state decisions

4019281930194019501960decided

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 94 N.J. Eq. 632 - Orange Society of New Jerusalem v. Konski · 84 N.J. Eq. 141 - Gerba v. Mitruske · 98 N.J. Eq. 502 - Wyatt v. Bergen · Nass v. Munzing

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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Neither does this letter, in my opinion, make time of the essence of the contract nor the two letters taken together. There is no fixed and definite time in either after which the defendants will consider the contract at an end. In Wyatt v. Bergen, 98 N.J. Eq. 502 , a letter of defendants, called in the opinion Exhibit 7, and set out in full on page 505, couched in much stronger terms than the ones before us in this case, was held by Vice-Chancellor Griffin (at p. 506) not to make time of the essence of the contract. The learned vice-chancellor, speaking of other notices referred to in the same case, says again (at p. 505) that he thinks, `in the language of Mr. Justice Holmes, in Stewart v. Griffith, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 528 ,' that they were `politely to apply a spur to the defendant to speed her in the performance of the contract.' This is an apt characterization, it seems to me, of the letters we are discussing. Again in Orange Society v. Konski, 94 N.J. Eq. 632 , Vice-Chancellor Backes held that a letter much stronger than those in this case, quoted at length (at p. 634), was not final (at p. 635).”
    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.