Olean v. Treglia’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
114 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 120 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably Heyman Associates No. 1 v. Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania (1995), Cheshire Mortgage Service, Inc. v. Montes (1992)
114 state decisions
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 Fidelity Federal Savings and Loan Association v. D Cuesta · Pandolphe's Auto Parts, Inc. v. Town of Manchester · 21 Cal. 3d 943 - Wellenkamp v. Bank of America · Hamm v. Taylor · Brauer v. Freccia
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 120 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“relief to a mortgagor who can prove that equitable circumstances require withholding of foreclosure or a reduction of the stated indebtedness.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“The purpose of the doctrine of unconscionability is to prevent oppression and unfair surprise. . . . As applied to real estate mortgages, the doctrine of unconscionability draws heavily on its counterpart in the Uniform Commercial Code which, although formally limited to transactions involving personal property, furnishes a useful guide for real property transactions. . . . As Official Comment 1 to § 2-302 of the Uniform Commercial Code suggests, [t]he basic test is whether, in the light of the general commercial background and the commercial needs of the particular trade or case, the clauses involved are so one-sided as to be unconscionable under the circumstances existing at the time of the making of the contract.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““A term providing that one party or his successor in interest may accelerate payment or performance or require collateral or additional collateral ‘at will’ or ‘when he deems himself insecure’ or in words of similar import shall be construed to mean that he shall have power to do so only if he in good faith believes that the prospect of payment or performance is impaired. The burden of establishing lack of good faith is on the party against whom the power has been exercised.””
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.