Daugherty v. Diment’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably Hitachi Credit America Corp. v. Signet Bank (1999), Countryside Orthopaedics, P.C. v. Peyton (2001)
7 federal appellate · 20 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 Ames v. American National Bank · American Realty Trust v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]here a business transaction is based upon more than one document executed by the parties, the documents will be construed together to determine the intent of the parties; each document will be employed to ascertain the meaning intended to be expressed by the others.”
3 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.