Kasishke v. Baker’s Empirical Analysis
146 F.2d 113 · 1944
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently April 1991 · most notably Hyman v. Regenstein (1958), Shipley v. Pittsburgh & L. E. R. Co. (1949)
19 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 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 Karrick v. Hannaman · Zimmerman v. Harding · Chisholm v. Gilmer · O. K. Boiler & Welding Co. v. Minnetonka Lumber Co. · Atlas Realty Co. v. Galt
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * At the outset, Kasishke furnished approximately $300,000. This was his main contribution to the business [which continued for approximately seven years]. Baker devoted all his time and energy to the management of the joint enterprise for which he received only a nominal salary. At the end of that time the properties had a value of approximately $6,000,000. We agree with the conclusions of the court that Baker’s interest attached from the date of the contract, and that the profits were earned and only his right to receive returns was postponed until the conditions were fulfilled.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Conditions precedent are not favored and the courts will not construe stipulations as conditions precedent unless required to do so by plain, unambiguous language.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.