Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 178 Ark. 1036 - Connelly v. Beauchamp

Connelly v. Beauchamp’s Empirical Analysis

1929

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
April 2010
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 2010

11 state decisions

401929193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 English v. Shelby · District of Columbia v. Clephane · Hot Springs Ry. Co. v. Maher · Hayes Grain & Commission Co. v. Federal Grain Co. · Blytheville Courier v. McCall

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.

  1. “The cardinal rule in the interpretation of contracts is to ascertain the intention of the parties and to give effect to that intention, if it can be done consistently with legal principles. The parties should always be bound for what they intended to be bound for, and no more. The intention of the parties means, however, the intention as shown by the contract, and not what they may have had in mind but did not express. The law presumes that the parties understood the import of their contract and that they had the intention which the terms of the contract manifest.”
    3 later decisions 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.