Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 102 Okla. 9 - Walker v. Johnson

Walker v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

1924

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
January 2008
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently January 2008

3 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

30192419301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Clark v. Slick Oil Co. · Smith-Wogan Hardware & Implement Co. v. Jos. W. Moon Buggy Co. · Early v. King · Stebbins v. Lena Lumber Co. · Bonicamp v. Starbuck

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

  1. ““A contract in writing may be altered by a contract in writing, or by an executed oral agreement, and not otherwise.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““ ‘As the effect of the execution of the subsequent oral agreement would be an alteration to its entire abrogation of the contract in writing, and Comp.Laws 1909, Sec. 1139 (Rev.Laws 1910, Sec. 988, IS Okl.St, Ann. § 237) provides: “A contract in writing may be altered by a contract in writing or by an executed oral agreement, and not otherwise,” the petition fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. This for the reason that, if the contract in writing cannot be thus abrogated, the contract stands as written, and the law will not recognize the oral agreement sought to be enforced.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““While under the above-quoted statute, it is plain that the parties to a written contract cannot alter the same by parol agreement, it is well settled that they may, by parol, rescind, discharge, or terminate a written contract, or may enter into a new contract as a substitute for the'old.””
    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.