1 N.J. Super. 353 - Weber v. De Cecco’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently March 2010
11 state decisions
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 30 N.J. Eq. 193 - Mutual Benefit Life Insurance v. Brown · 34 Ohio App. 133 - Brudno v. Kohn · De Cecco v. Weber
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This statute was originally enacted to prevent fraud and perjury in the enforcement of obligations depending for their evidence on the memory of witnesses by requiring certain enumerated contracts and transactions to be evidenced by a writing signed by the parties. There is no requirement in the statute that the signature be in definite or particular form. It has been held that typewritten or printed names, signatures in ink or pencil, or any name or symbol used by a party with the intention of constituting it his signature, is sufficient to comply with the statutory requirements, (citations omitted) (emphasis added) Weber v. DeCecco, supra at 358.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Matthews v. Deane“renewed for sixty months (60) from the first day of September, 1944.”
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.