Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 200 N.Y. 299 - Smith v. . Dotterweich

Smith v. . Dotterweich’s Empirical Analysis

1911

Citation profile

94
cited by 94 later decisions
12
states following
May 1991
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 75 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 94 later decisions — most recently May 1991 · most notably Damora v. Christ-Janer (1981), Arnold Palmer Golf Co. v. Fuqua Industries, Inc. (1976)

13 federal appellate · 75 state decisions — followed in 12 states

230191119201930194019501960197019801990decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedSmith v. Dotterweich

Relationships

Relies on Thomas v. . Scutt · Eighmie v. . Taylor · Jamestown Business College Assn. v. . Allen · Reynolds v. . Robinson · Benton v. . Martin

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 94 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The question now before us is whether the testimony of the defendant, supplemented by such legitimate inferences therefrom as are most favorable to him, is of sufficient weight and probative force to create a question of fact for the jury, and that question obviously depends upon the nature and effect of the oral agreement to which he testified. If that agreement, which for present purposes must be assumed to have been made, created a condition precedent, without the performance of which the notes never became valid obligations in favor of the plaintiff, then there is a question of fact for the arbitrament of a jury. The converse of the proposition is equally simple. If the effect of that agreement was to ingraft upon a valid contract a condition subsequent, the learned trial justice was right in ruling that the issue was one of law for his decision.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “■ “Thus, to state the difference most concretely, the case at bar is one in which the oral testimony tends to show that the writing purporting to be a contract is in fact no contract at all; while in the case of the Jamestown Business College the oral testimony was in direct contradiction of the written contract, as to the existence and validity of which there was no controversy.””
    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.