Robertson v. Garvan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

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

1. ““The claim that partial performance prevents the defendants from questioning the validity of tho agreement is equally unconvincing. It could not render a contract valid which lacked mutuality. The only right a partial performance of an agreement without a consideration gives is that of recovery of the value of anything furnished. The right of action, in such a case is not in assumpsit on the contract, but in indebitatus assumpsit. If the buyers here had not exchanged mutual promises, which created a valid bilateral contract, they would only be liable to pay at the agreed price for such shipments of zinc as were made before they refused to take further deliveries. This is plain from the opinion of Circuit Justice Holmes in Sterling Coal Co. v. Silver Spring Bleaching & Dying Co., 162 F. 848 , 89 C. C. A. 520 , and of Judge Sanborn in Cold Blast Transportation Co. v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co., 114 F. 77 , 52 C. C. A. 25 , 57 L. R. A. 696 , as well as from general principles.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hind, Rolph & Co. v. Bertaut & Co.