Barry v. Barry’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently May 2022
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Barry v. Barry · Worthy v. McKesson Corp. · McGee v. Breezy Point Estates · National Hydro Systems v. M.A. Mortenson Co. · 532 F. Supp. 923 - Bergstrom v. Sears, Roebuck and 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“where a client has created the appearance that his attorney has authority to settle a case and the attorney exceeds his authority in some way, if the adversary relies on the settlement to its detriment, the client may be estopped to deny his attorney's authority.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The parties to a contract are bound by the objective meaning of the words they use; their private, unexpressed thoughts cannot alter the meaning of the words they uttered or actions they took.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Under Minnesota law, settlement of a client's claim is not subsumed within the ordinary agency of an attorney for his clients, so an attorney must be specially authorized to settle a claim.”
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.