Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 214 F.2d 395 - Reynolds v. Maples

Reynolds v. Maples’s Empirical Analysis

214 F.2d 395 · 1954

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
April 2008
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently April 2008 · most notably United Artists Corporation v. Masterpiece Productions, Inc., and Robert S. Benjamin, Arthur B. Krim, Seymour M. Peyser (1955), 161 F. Supp. 132 - United States v. Rogers & Rogers (1958)

12 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

100195419601970198019902000decided

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 Dyer v. MacDougall · Surkin v. Charteris · Smith County Oil Co. v. Jefcoat

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

  1. “a continuing offer to sell which is irrevocable during the period specified therein. Until it is exercised it contains no elements of a sale. Such a contract is necessarily unilateral, since it binds the optionee to do nothing but grants him the right to accept the offer or not, as he may choose, within the time and manner specified.... It is incumbent upon the optionee to exercise his option in the manner provided in the contract and, unless such requirements are waived, his failure to do so, or his attempt to exercise it in another manner, is inoperative to form a binding contract for sale.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “`It is incumbent upon the optionee to exercise the option in the manner provided in the contract and, unless such requirements are waived, his failure to do so, or his attempt to exercise it in another manner, is inoperative to form a binding contract. . . .' [quoting Reynolds v. Maples , 214 F.2d 395 , 398 (5th Cir.1954)].”
    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.