Witherell v. Lasky’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently August 2003
2 federal appellate · 4 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 Jacob & Youngs, Inc. v. Kent · Van Clief v. . Van Vechten · Smith v. . Brady · Spence v. . Ham · Woodward v. . Fuller
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.
“To read into the contract a requirement that the party for whose benefit the condition was inserted must make a demand for the performance thereof is but another way of stating that the clause is not a condition precedent, but a mere promise....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“we cannot ... excuse a complete failure to perform without either a valid reason for noncompliance or even an attempt to perform, the prerequisite considered by the parties sufficiently substantial to make it a condition precedent to payment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Substantial performance might make compliance with an express condition unnecessary, but only when the departure from full performance is an inconsiderable trifle having no pecuniary importance.”
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.