Browder v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 15 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It is, of course, well settled that the whole contract need not be embodied in the memorandum relied upon. Reynolds v. Dixon, 187 Va. 101, 106 , 46 S.E.2d 6, 8 . But there must be an underlying complete oral agreement for the sale and purchase of the land. As is said in Williston on Contracts, Rev.Ed., Vol. 2, § 567, pp. 1618-19, “The memorandum need not itself constitute a contract, and apart from its effect as a memorandum, it need have no legal operation. There must be a valid oral contract, however, of which the memorandum is an accurate statement, though not necessarily made with that intent.” In other words, “It is the oral contract which is enforced, but it can be enforced only when the statute has been satisfied.” Williston on Contracts, Rev.Ed., Vol. 2, § 590, p. 1701. In Donald Friedman & Co. v. Newman, 255 N.Y. 340 , 174 N.E. 703, 704 , 73 A.L.R. 95, 97 , the principle is thus stated: “. . . Except as evidence of the oral contract, the memorandum has no force or effect, unless and until the oral contract has been established by a preponderance of evidence. Then, if accurate and complete, it prevents the interposition of the statute of frauds as a bar to the enforcement of the oral contract.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hewitt v. Hutter