109 Ind. App. 330 - Block v. Sherman’s Empirical Analysis
1941
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably Nucor Corporation v. Aceros Y Maquilas De Occidente Sa De Cv (1994), 113 Ind. App. 596 - Foltz v. Evans (1943)
9 federal appellate · 29 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 Poel v. . Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. · Graham v. Henderson Elevator Co. · Berman Stores Co. v. Hirsh · Ridgway v. Ingram · Wertheimer v. Klinger Mills, Inc.
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘A memorandum, in order to make enforceable a contract within the Statute, may be any document or writing, formal or informal, signed by the party to be charged or by his agent actually or apparently authorized thereunto, which states with reasonable certainty, “ ‘ (a) each party to the contract either by his own name, or by such a description as will serve to identify him, or by the name or description of his agent, and “‘(b) the land, goods or other subject-matter to which the contract relates, and “ ‘ (c) the terms and conditions of all the promises constituting the contract and by whom -and to whom the promises are made.’ ””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Newman v. Huff · Hubbard v. Whitham“signed instrument must so clearly and definitely refer to the unsigned one that by force of the reference the unsigned one becomes a part of the signed instrument”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““In Pomeroy’s Specific Performance of Contracts, 3d Ed. (1926), sec. 90, p. 217, the author states: ‘The subject-matter of the agreement must all be included in the memorandum, and must be described with sufficient exactness to render its identity certain upon the introduction of extrinsic evidence simply disclosing the situation of the parties at, and immediately before, the time of making the contract. * * * The description of the subject-matter may be wholly or partially contained in an auxiliary writing, which, if referred to in such a manner as to establish the connection, becomes a constituent part of the memorandum; . . .’ “In Browne on the Statute of Fraud, 5th Ed., sec. 346b, on page 470, the author states: ‘It is often the case that the terms of the contract are not all contained in any one paper. The question then arises, under what circumstances two or more papers can be offered in evidence as together constituting the memorandum, one only or all being signed, as the case may be. With regard to the first case, the rule is that the letter or other paper that is signed is to be regarded as incorporating and reciting any other writing referred to in it. It follows, then, that in the case of any signed paper, those writings referred to in it may be read, provided they were in existence at the time when the paper referring to them was signed. It seems also that one signature may apply not only to the paper on which it is written, but also- to another which at the time ”
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.