Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 219 NW2D 658 - Carmichael v. Iowa State Highway Commission

Carmichael v. Iowa State Highway Commission’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
11
states following
April 2000
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently April 2000

2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions — followed in 11 states

1201974198019902000decided

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 Gair v. Peck · Hamilton v. Wosepka · 30 Ill. 2d 73 - Pocius v. Halvorsen · Superior Court of State of Washington King County v. State of Washington Yellow Cab Service Inc · 62 Wis. 2d 179 - Herro, McAndrews & Porter, S. C. v. Gerhardt

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

  1. ““ ‘The language employed by parties to a contract should receive a fair, reasonable, and practical construction, since it is to be presumed that the parties contracted with reference to fair, reasonable, and practical results. Where the language of a contract is contradictory, obscure, or ambiguous, or where its meaning is doubtful, so that it is susceptible of two constructions, one of which makes it fair, customary, and such as prudent men would naturally execute, while the other makes it inequitable, unusual, or such as reasonable men would not be likely to enter into, the interpretation which makes a fair, rational, and probable contract must be preferred.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The award for fees is for the client, not the attorney, and they, in this situation, are free to make their own fee contract.”
    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.