Zehler v. E. L. Bruce Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Galloway Corp. v. S.B. Ballard Construction Co. (1995), Gajewski v. Bratcher (1974)
1 federal appellate · 17 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 Whitt v. Godwin · City of Roanoke v. Blair · Ewell v. Brock
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“parol evidence cannot be considered to explain a patent ambiguity, that is, to supply the understanding that the parties could have reasonably been expected to reach where the language of the instrument reflects no understanding.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]f two RCAFs exist, the term `RCAF' would be `a term which, upon application to external objects, is found to fit two or more of them equally.'”
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.