Isom v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

48 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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The question of waiver, the voluntary surrender of a known right, is in the main a question of intention, and the authorities hold that, to be effectual, it must be manifested in some unequivocal manner; if not express, then by such language or conduct as to evince clearly the intention to surrender. Bennecke v. Insurance Co., 105 U.S. 355 , 26 L.Ed. 990 [ (1881) ]; Balfour v. Parkinson (C.C.) 84 Fed. 855, 861 [ (1898) ]. Quoting Sanborn, J., in Rice v. Fidelity & Deposit Co., 103 Fed. 427, 435 , 43 C.C.A. 270, 278 [ (1900) ]: “ ‘To constitute a waiver, there must be an intention to relinquish the right, or there must be words or acts calculated to induce the other contracting party to believe, and which deceive him into the belief, that the holder of the right has abandoned it.’ “‘A waiver will not be implied from slight circumstances, but must be evidenced by an unequivocal and decisive act, clearly proved.’ 29 Am. & Eng. Law, p. 1105.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Alabama Boating Centers, Inc. v. Textron, Inc.

2. ““The question of waiver, the voluntary ■surrender of a known right, is in the main ■■a question of intention, and the authorities hold that, to be effectual, it must be •manifested in some unequivocal manner; if not express, then by such language or •conduct as to evince clearly the intention to surrender. Bennecke v. [Connecticut Mut. L.] Insurance Co., 105 U.S. 355 , 26 L.Ed. 990 ; Balfour v. Parkinson (C.C.) 84 F. 855, 861 . Quoting Sanborn, J., in Rice v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. [8 Cir.], 103 F. 427, 435 , 43 C.C.A. 270, 278 .” Isom et al. v. Johnson, 205 Ala. 157 , 87 So. 543, 545 ; 67 C.J. 309, 310.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Liverpool London Globe Ins. Co. v. Dickinson

3. “This equitable doctrine was formerly carried to an unreasonable extent, and the specific performance of contracts enforced after such a lapse of time and change of circumstances as to produce as much injustice as it avoided. In modern times, the doctrine has been guardedly applied; and it is now held that time, although not ordinarily of the essence of a contract in equity, yet may be made so by clear manifestation of the intent of the parties in the contract itself... [Emphasis added.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 385 So. 2d 973 - Gay v. Tompkins