Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 10 SO2D 67 - Lervick v. White Top Cabs

Lervick v. White Top Cabs’s Empirical Analysis

1942

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
2
states following
June 2004
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently June 2004

2 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

801942195019601970198019902000decided

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 Rottman v. Beverly · Langenstein v. Reynaud · Tyer v. Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. · Loewenberg v. Fidelity Union Casualty Co. · Morris v. Hava

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. “This contract must be reduced into writing.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"1797. When the parties have the legal capacity to form a contract, the next requisite to its validity is their consent. This being a mere operation of the mind, can have no effect, unless it be evidence in some manner that shall cause it to be understood by the other parties to the contract. To prevent error in this essential point, the law establishes, by certain rules adapted to the nature of the contract, what circumstances shall be evidence of such consent, and how those circumstances shall be proved; these come within the purview of the law of evidence. * * * * * * "1812. Express consent must be given in a language understood by the party who accepts, and the words by which it is conveyed must be in themselves unequivocal; if they may mean different things, they give rise to error, which, as is hereinafter provided, destroys the effect of a contract. * * * * * * "1824. The reality of the cause is a kind of precedent condition to the contract, without which the consent would not have been given, because the motive being that which determines the will, if there be no such cause where one was supposed to exist, or if it be falsely represented, there can be no valid consent."”
    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.