Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 164 IND 466 - Zimmerman v. Zehendner

Zimmerman v. Zehendner’s Empirical Analysis

1905

Citation profile

68
cited by 68 later decisions
7
states following
September 1994
most recently cited

64 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently September 1994 · most notably Seavey v. Estate of Fanning (1975), Buratti & Montandon v. Tennant (1949)

64 state decisions

1901905191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Board of Commissioners v. Gibson · Board of Commissioners v. Shipley · Beahler v. Clark · Pulse v. Miller · Ridgway v. Ingram

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

  1. ““In short, the contract, in so far as it relates to this action, is only partially in writing. The important feature — the amount of commission to be paid, is to be ascertained by parol testimony in regard to an understanding which may prove to be a misunderstanding, the exact thing which the statute was designed to prevent. A contract partly written and partly verbal is a parol contract, and contracts required by law to be in writing must be wholly written to be enforceable. . . . A material part of the contract in suit being verbal, it must be held to be an oral contract, and therefore invalid.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The statute requires that the contract for the payment of a commission for the sale of real estate be in writing, and a written memorandum or acknowledgment of an oral contract will not fulfill the requirements of the law. . . . The important feature — the amount of commission to be paid— is to be ascertained by parol testimony . . . the exact thing which the statute was designed to prevent.””
    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.