Bear v. Bernstein’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably Springdale Gayfer's Store Co. v. DH Holmes Co., Ltd. (1967), Laney v. Early (1974)
2 federal appellate · 59 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 Hutchinson v. Ulrich · Virgin v. Garrett · Minister, Elders & Deacons of the Reformed Protestant Dutch Church v. Madison Avenue Building Co. · Degnon Contracting Co. v. . City of New York · Bennett v. . Petrino
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]here the language is ambiguous, `its construction will not be extended by implication or include anything not plainly prohibited and all doubts and ambiguities must be resolved against [the party seeking enforcement].'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“"It here only limits the use to residence purposes, and does not prohibit the erection of more than one house for that purpose, nor prescribe the sort of house or require that it shall be for a private residence. "We think the rule is well expressed in Bowers v. Fifth Avenue Seventy-Seventh Street Corporation , 125 Misc. 343 , 209 N.Y.S. 743 , 744 , to be that 'unless there is specific language, such as "for the use of one family," or "of the type now prevailing," or other specific limitation, that general words such as "dwelling houses" . . . do not limit to dwelling houses of the type prevailing at the time of the execution of the covenant, but include any structures used for residential purposes as developed by changing conditions.' " (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““The fact that eminent courts of our country have entertained diametrically opposing views as to the intent and meaning of such character of restriction but makes it apodictic that such a covenant is to the judicial mind ambiguous and doubtful and emphasizes the necessity of calling into play these well-known rules of construction, resulting-in resolving the ambiguity and doubt against the appellee who here seeks to enforce the restraint.””
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.