Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 231 Va. 206 - Ross v. Craw

Ross v. Craw’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

91
cited by 91 later decisions
1
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Eure v. Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock Corp. (2002), TM Delmarva Power, L.L.C. v. NCP of Virginia, L.L.C. (2002)

9 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

3601986199020002010decided

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 Winn v. Aleda Const. Co., Inc. · Wilson v. Holyfield · Berry v. Klinger · Globe Iron Construction Co. v. First National Bank · W. F. Magann Corp. v. Virginia-Carolina Electrical Works, Inc.

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

  1. “A well-settled principle of contract law dictates that where an agreement is complete on its face, is plain and unambiguous in its terms, the court is not at liberty to search for its meaning beyond the instrument itself. A contract is not deemed ambiguous merely because the parties disagree as to the meaning of the language they used to express their agreement.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “As we have noted in the past, ... the word 'may' is primarily permissive.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “words are not meaningless merely because they impose no legal obligation. Parties frequently include precatory language in agreements ... to express a sentiment, wish, or desire with regard to the parties' future course of conduct.”
    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.