Bernstein v. Nemeyer’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 6 district · 67 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Connell v. Colwell (1990), Skuzinski v. Bouchard Fuels, Inc. (1997)
3 federal appellate · 6 district · 67 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 Pandolphe's Auto Parts, Inc. v. Town of Manchester · Randall v. Loftsgaarden · 2 Conn. App. 294 - Kavarco v. T. J. E., Inc. · Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Murphy · Favorite v. Miller
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In determining whether a failure to render or to offer performance is material, the following circumstances are significant:”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“It follows from an uncured material failure of performance that the other party to the contract is discharged from any further duty to render performances yet to be exchanged.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“We have regularly held that it is a condition of rescission and restitution that [the party seeking rescission] offer, as nearly as possible, to place the other party in the same situation that existed prior to the execution of the contract. Metcalfe v. Talarski, [ 213 Conn. 145 , 153-54 , (1989)]; Duksa v. Middletown, 192 Conn. 191 , 197 , (1984); Keyes v. Brown, 155 Conn. 469 , 476 , (1967); Kavarco T.J.E., Inc., 2 Conn. App. 294 , 299 (1984).”
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.