Reynolds v. Ashabranner’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently August 2005 · most notably Universal C. I. T. Credit Co. v. Rone (1970), Advocat, Inc. v. Sauer (2003)
60 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 Temple Cotton Oil Co. v. Skinner · Branch v. Moore · American Sales Book Co. v. Whitaker · American Insurance v. Haynie · Natural Gas & Fuel Co. v. Lyles
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Even in the case of a written contract duly executed by both parties, this court has repeatedly held that parol evidence is admissible to prove that it was not to be a complete and binding agreement until certain conditions precedent have been fulfilled. Barr Cash & [Package Carrier], Co. v. Brooks-Ozan Mer. Co., 82 Ark. 219 , 101 S.W. 408 ; American Sales Book Co. v. Whitaker, 100 Ark. 360, 366 , 140 S.W. 132 , 37 L.R.A.,N.S., 91; Worthen v. Stewart, 116 Ark. 294 , 172 S.W. 855 ; Reynolds v. Ashabranner, 212 Ark. 718 , 207 S.W.2d 304, 307 . In the Reynolds case we said: ‘The situation here is not that of a waiver of a condition precedent stated in the written contract; rather, it is the waiving of a condition precedent to the coming into existence of the contract. See 17 C.J.S. Contracts § 338, p. 792, on “Conditions Precedent.” In 13 C.J. 791, in discussing the waiver of a condition precedent in actions concerning contracts, the general rule is stated: “The question as to whether a condition precedent has been performed is purely one of fact to be determined by the jury under the evidence. And the same has been held to be true of the question as to whether the performance of such condition has been waived, but the jury should be properly instructed as to the law.” See also 17 C.J.S. Contracts, § 630 [p. 1297].’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The general rule is, that, unless there are provisions to the contrary, one who employs a broker is liable for the broker’s compensation, regardless of the employer’s interest in the property. ’ ’”
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.