Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 252 Va. 26 - Kelley v. Griffin

Kelley v. Griffin’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
September 2016
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 2016

13 state decisions

90199620002010decided

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 Copenhaver v. Rogers · Valley Landscape Co. v. Rolland · Ward v. Ernst & Young · Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Fireguard Corp. · Norfolk-Portsmouth Newspapers, Inc. v. Stott

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

  1. ““An immediate estate or interest in or the benefit of a condition respecting any estate may be taken by a person under an instrument, although he be not a party thereto; and if a covenant or promise be made for the benefit, in whole or in part, of a person with whom it is not made, or with whom it is made jointly with others, such person, whether named in the instrument or not, may maintain in his own name any action thereon which he might maintain in case it had been made with him only and the consideration had moved from him to the party making such covenant or promise. In such action the covenantor or promisor shall be permitted to make all defenses he may have, not only against the covenantee or promisee, but against such beneficiary as well.””
    1 later decision 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.