Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 245 Ala. 275 - Yost v. Patrick

Yost v. Patrick’s Empirical Analysis

1944

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
4
states following
July 2010
most recently cited

39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently July 2010 · most notably Daughtry v. Capital Gas Company (1969), Joseph v. Hopkins (1963)

39 state decisions

10019441950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Company v. Hall's Safe Company C H O · Shelton v. Shelton · Maddox v. Fuller · J. L. Davis, Inc. v. Christopher · Collas v. Brown

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

  1. “"A person who has not executed or signed the contract or covenant is not bound by the stipulation against engaging in business, and he may not be enjoined from competing with the covenantee. He may, however, be restrained from engaging in the business in partnership with, or as an employee of, the covenanter or seller. * * *" Yost v. Patrick , 245 Ala. 275 , 280 , 17 So.2d 240 , 244 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “It is not essential that the contract for the sale of a business expressly include the good will thereof. Covenants [not to compete] designed, in the nature of them, to protect the good will of the business being sold, imply a sale of the good will. [Id. at 244.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"One who sells the good will of a business may agree with the buyer, and one who is employed as an agent, servant, or employee may agree with his employer, to refrain from carrying on or engaging in a similar business and from soliciting old customers of such employer within a specified county, city, or part thereof, so long as the buyer or any person deriving title to the good will from him, and so long as such employer carries on a like business therein."”
    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.