Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 206 Kan. 682 - Fast v. Kahan

Fast v. Kahan’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
6
states following
October 2013
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 19 district · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently October 2013 · most notably Duffin v. Patrick (1973), Desbien v. Penokee Farmers Union Cooperative Ass'n (1976)

4 federal appellate · 19 district · 33 state decisions

17019711980199020002010decided

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 Estate of Johnson v. Johnson · Hiniger v. Judy · Schnug v. Schnug · Pittsburg Vitrified Paving & Building Brick Co. v. Bailey · Mosher v. Kansas Coöperative Wheat Marketing Ass'n

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

  1. “the terms of a written contract may be varied, modified, waived, annulled, or wholly set aside by any subsequently executed contract, whether such subsequently executed contract be in writing or in parol.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Ambiguity in a written instrument does not appear until the application of pertinent rules of interpretation to the face of the instrument leaves it genuinely uncertain which one of two or more meanings is the proper one. (Casey v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 205 Kan. 495 , 470 P.2d 821 ; Schnug v. Schnug, 203 Kan. 380 , 454 P.2d 474 .)” [Fast v. Kahan, 206 Kan. 682, 684 , 481 P.2d 958, 959 (1971).] “A cardinal principle of contract law is that in the absence of fraud or mutual mistake, a clear and unambiguous contract must be enforced according to its terms. (In re Estate of Johnson, 202 Kan. 684 , 452 P.2d 286 .)” [Fast v. Kahan, supra.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.