Compagnie Financiere de CIC et de L'Union Europeenne v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
232 F.3d 153 · 2000
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 8 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Weisgram v. Marley Co. · Seiden Associates, Inc. v. Anc Holdings, Inc. · Sayers v. Rochester Telephone Corp. Supplemental Management Pension Plan · Mellon Bank Na v. United Bank Corporation of New York · Marine Midland Bank-New York v. Graybar Electric Co.
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 109 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he court may resolve ambiguity in contract language as a matter of law if the evidence presented about the parties’ intended meaning is so one-sided that no reasonable person could decide the contrary.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[c]ontract language is ambiguous if it is 'capable of more than one meaning when viewed objectively by a reasonably intelligent person who has examined the context of the entire integrated agreement.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Court may resolve the ambiguity in the contractual language as a matter of law if there is no extrinsic evidence to support one party's interpretation of the ambiguous language or if the extrinsic evidence is so one sided that no reasonable factfinder could decide contrary to one party's interpretation.”
2 later decisions 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.