Clark v. Orkin Exterminating Co.’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Spencer v. Brown · Felty v. Graves-Humphreys Co. · Shaw v. Stroud · Sensenbrenner v. Rust, Orling & Neale, Architects, 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The [Act], for instance, prevents firms from making contracts that are deceptive and unconscionable. Va. Code § 59.1-200(A). Similarly, the frustration of essential purpose doctrine, applicable to contracts for goods, provides that an exclusive remedy failing the contract’s essential purpose must yield to other cures. See Environtech Corp. v. Halco Engineering, Inc., 234 Va. 583, 587 , 364 S.E.2d 215 (1988). These doctrines provide evidence of the public policy against enforcing contractual provisions that immunize a party from making good on implied warranties.”
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.