Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 155 F.2d 361 - Bach v. Friden Calculating Mach. Co.

Bach v. Friden Calculating Mach. Co.’s Empirical Analysis

155 F.2d 361 · 1946

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
3
states following
September 1985
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently September 1985 · most notably Mid-Continent Telephone Corp. v. Home Telephone Co. (1970), Bateman v. Ford Motor Co. (1962)

31 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

16019461950196019701980decided

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 Wood v. . Duff-Gordon · Moran v. . Standard Oil Co. · Philadelphia Ball Club, Ltd. v. Lajoie · Kuhn v. Princess Lida of Thurn & Taxis · Bach v. Friden Calculating Mach. Co.

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

  1. “The contract was not one terminable at the will of Friden. Certainly by its terms and all attendant circumstances, it was construed by both parties as having a large degree of permanence____ An agency or distributorship which necessitates perfecting an organization and investing capital, contemplates a measure of continuity____ It might be concluded that in these circumstances it was not, in good conscience, reasonable to deprive them [franchisees] of the opportunity of reaping the benefits for a period of an expanding business era generally expected to follow the end of the war.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[O]ne is bound, not only by what he subjectively intends, but by what he leads others reasonably to think that he intends.”
    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.