Gluckman v. Holzman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 18 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is my conclusion then that under the circumstances of this case the court should consider evidence which might tend to clarify the intent of the parties with respect to the [retirement] provisions in question. This evidence would properly include such testimony as complainant could produce in support of his allegation that the defendant Mark Holzman promised and agreed to give up his practice of medicine in May or June of 1946. Evidence of the oral agreement, if available, would not be used to show fraud in the inducement because complainant in his brief has stated that he does not rely on fraud. Moreover, it could not under the circumstances be used as a basis for a finding that it was an oral term of an otherwise written agreement. However, should the court construe the provisions in question to be silent on the time of the performance of the condition, then the law would presume performance of the condition was intended within a reasonable time. The evidence of the oral agreement would then be evidence of what the parties considered would be a reasonable time for performance of the condition. Maxfield v. Terry, supra [ 4 Del. Ch. 618 ]; 32 C. J. S. Evidence, § 853.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gluckman v. Holzman

2. “apply the rule that where no time is fixed for the performance of a condition precedent, it will be presumed that it is to be performed within a reasonable time.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bushansky v. Soon-Shiong