Yates v. Grosh’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
December 1996
most recently cited
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Clark & Enersen, Hamersky, Schlaebitz, Burroughs & Thomsen, Inc. v. Schimmel Hotels Corp. · In Re Estate of Layton · Rudolph v. Hartung · Reifenrath v. Hansen
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In order to satisfy the requirements of this section [§ 36-106] the burden was upon plaintiffs to prove an oral contract the terms of which were clear, satisfactory, and unequivocal, and also part performance, and that the acts done in performance were referable solely to the contract sought to be enforced ... so that nonperformance by the other party would amount to a fraud upon him.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Darsaklis v. Schildt“[w]e have consistently required that a party seeking specific performance of an oral contractfor the sale of real estate upon the basis of part performance must prove an oral contract, the terms of which are clear, satisfactory, and unequivocal, and that the acts done in part performance were referrable solely to the contract sought to be enforced____”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sayer v. Bowley
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.