Taylor v. Roeder’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
2 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently June 2015 · most notably Resolution Trust Corporation v. Maplewood Investments (1994), Marriott v. Harris (1988)
2 district · 16 state decisions
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 123 W. Va. 707 - Perkins v. Hall · McLean Bank v. Nelson · Associated East Mortgage Co. v. Highland Park, Inc. · Constitution Bank & Trust Co. v. Robinson · Evans v. Joyner
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is sufficient that at any time of payment the holder is able to determine the amount then payable from the instrument itself with any necessary computation. ... The computation must be one which can be made from the instrument itself without reference to any outside source, and this section does not make negotiable a note payable with interest ‘at the current rate.’ ””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) The sum payable is a sum certain even though it is to be paid (a) with stated interest or by stated installments; or (b) with stated different rates of interest before and after default or a specified date; or (c) with a stated discount or addition if paid before or after the date fixed for payment....”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he drafters of the Uniform Commercial Code adopted criteria of negotiability intended to exclude an instrument which requires reference to any source outside the instrument itself in order to ascertain the amount due, subject only to the exceptions specifically provided for by the U.C.C.”
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.