Elk Refining Co. v. Daniel’s Empirical Analysis
199 F.2d 479 · 1952
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 2004
2 federal appellate · 2 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 131 W. Va. 391 - Cottrell v. Nurnberger · Hunt v. Hunt · 130 W. Va. 519 - Dyke v. Alleman · Buena Vista Co. v. Billmyer · 81 W. Va. 62 - Martin v. South Bluefield Land 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“without intention of performance, for the fraudulent purpose of putting the promisor in an advantageous position at the expense of the promisee.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. 22 Ucc Rep.serv.2d 166 · Abex Corporation/jetway Division, a Delaware Corporation v. Controlled Systems, Incorporated, a West Virginia Corporation, Abex Corporation/jetway Division, a Delaware Corporation v. Controlled Systems, Incorporated, a West Virginia Corporation, Abex Corporation/jetway Division, a Delaware Corporation v. Controlled Systems, Incorporated, a West Virginia Corporation
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.