Bradshaw v. McDonald’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

66 state decisions

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

1. ““When the common law rules of evidence were incorporated into Texas law, there were certain firmly established limitations or exceptions to the rule that parol evidence was inadmissible to contradict. or vary the terms of an instrument in writing. Among these was the principle that parol evidence was admissible to vary or contradict a recital of consideration in a written instrument. This exception, developed in the common law courts of England, was based on the reasoning that proof of a different consideration -did not come within the abuses sought to be prevented by the parol evidence rule. Where, however, the consideration expressed in the writing was not a mere rcital but was contractual in nature, the exception- did not operate and parol evidence was not let in to show an additional or different consideration.”' (Emphasis supplied.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jackson v. Hernandez

2. ““ * *. a deed, absolute on its face, may.be controlled by parol evidence, showing that it was intended as a mortgage, .has long.been the set-tied. law in this State. * * * The character of the transaction is determined, not by the form of the contract, or the name given it by the parties, but by their real agreement and intention, and the construction which the law affixes thereto. * * * 'If the conveyance is in fact designed as a security for the payment of money, equity treats it as a mortgage.’ * - * * ‘If, upon the whole case, it appears ‘that the real purpose of the transaction was to secure the payment of a debt, the instrument will be held to be a mortgage, no matter what may be its form.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Smith v. Rozelle

3. “‘ * * * The character of the transaction is determined, not by the form of the contract, or the name given it by the parties, but by their real agreement and intention, and the construction which the law affixes thereto. [Citations.] If the conveyance is in fact designed as a security for the payment of money, equity treats it as a mortgage.’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Henley v. United States